Trickle Up Poverty: Stopping Obama’s Attack on Our Borders, Economy, and Security

by Michael Savage

  If the aforementioned actor had done his homework rather than read a script about something he doesn’t understand, he might have learned the Fish and Wildlife Service estimates that “the polar bear population is 20,000 to 25,000 bears, whereas in the 1950s and 1960s, estimates were as low as 5,000-10,000 bears due to sport hunting, which has since been restricted.”63 In other words, five times the number of polar bears roams the planet today than fifty years ago.

  As for those ice caps, political analyst, Jim McConalogue, of the European Foundation, put it this way: “Since the cause of global warming is mostly natural, then there is in actual fact very little we can do about it. We are still not able to control the sun.”64

  Hot Air and Scare From Hollywood Idiots

  The global warming scam has all the ingredients for a blockbuster movie. Lies, deception, payoffs, backroom deals, falsification of data, record tampering, and a cast of buffoonish characters in empty suits pulling off the greatest scam of the century. Not surprisingly, Leonardo “DiCrapio,” a junior member of the scare-America crowd, figured he’d cash in on the global warming scarefest with a movie of his own, The 11th Hour.

  You probably never heard of it because it tanked at the box office.

  Fashioning himself an expert on the subject, yet denying the input from any trained scientist with a different opinion,65 DiCrapio speaks in solemn tones throughout the movie trying to sound authoritative. After all, he is convinced that global warming is “the number one environmental challenge.”66 But his narration sounds more like a junior high kid trying to muster the courage to ask a girl out on a date. Against the backdrop of earthquakes, hurricanes, and flooding, this neophyte says, “The evidence is now clear. Industrial civilization has caused irreparable damage. Our political and corporate leaders have consistently ignored the overwhelming scientific evidence.”67

  Did you see what this Al Gore—wannabe just said?

  Overwhelming scientific evidence?

  What universe is DiCrapio living in?

  I guess he didn’t bother consulting with John Coleman, founder of the Weather Channel, who amassed more than thirty thousand scientists—nine thousand with real PhD’s in science—who signed up on the side of debunking the myth of global warming.68 Coleman was one of the first in his field to challenge the “dastardly scientists with environmental and political motives” who “manipulated long term scientific data back in the late 1990’s to create an allusion [sic] of rapid global warming … Their friends in government steered huge research grants their way to keep the movement growing.”69

  Coleman echoed something I’ve been saying for the last five years on radio when he said global warming “is not about environmentalism or politics. It is not a religion. It is not something you ‘believe in.’ It is science; the science of meteorology. This is my field of life-long expertise. And I am telling you Global Warming is a nonevent, a manufactured crisis and a total scam.”70

  Then again, DiCrapio would have difficulty entertaining such an opposing point of view. I’m sure listening to a meteorologist might be too much to ask of a kid who, by his own admission, “never went to college.”71 It’s clear that educating the public with actual scientific truth wasn’t his goal. When asked what he hoped the film would accomplish, DiCrapio said, “I want the public to be very scared by what they see. I want them to see a very bleak future. I want them to feel disillusioned halfway through and feel hopeless.”72

  To what end is the purpose of such fear mongering?

  He wants us to embrace “green technology” and engage in a “cultural transformation” to save the planet. Let’s be clear on this point. I don’t oppose the overall concept of being a good steward of the world in which we live. Whether you’re a liberal or conservative, each of us would do well to find ways to reduce pollution and produce energy-saving devices.

  On that topic, I was collecting and studying plant life in the South Pacific (1969–1989) long before being an environmentalist was fashionable. I have two Masters degrees in anthropology and botany and I was a pioneer in the field of ethno-medicine upon which I formed the basis for my doctoral work at the University of California at Berkeley. I’m a trained scientist. I understand ecology better than this actor knows the clasps of brassieres.

  Where I disagree with Leonardo DiCrapio, Al Goreleoni, and the other soothsayers, is the use of trumped up science to scare people into emptying their pockets to support radical eco-terrorist issues and causes while worshiping at the altar of environmentalism. Make no mistake about it. Adherents to this fable, having tuned out all contrary scientific data, are zealots with a capital “Z” and will say or do anything—including the manipulation of data or the suppression of facts—to advance their cause.

  Case in point.

  About the time DiCrapio was promoting his film, singer-songwriter Sheryl Crow teamed up with another global warming alarmist, whose name doesn’t matter, to kick off a “Stop Global Warming College Tour.” Her goal? She hoped to enlist thousands of college sheeple to fight the perceived threat that global warming represents. Midway through the tour, Crow actually made this suggestion to combat global warming:

  I have spent the better part of this tour trying to come up with easy ways for us all to become a part of the solution to global warming. Although my ideas are in the earliest stages of development, they are,

  in my mind, worth investigating. One of my favorites is in the area of conserving trees, which we heavily rely on for oxygen.

  I propose a limitation be put on how many squares of toilet paper can be used in any one sitting. Now, I don’t want to rob any law-abiding American of his or her God-given rights, but I think we are an industrious enough people that we can make it work with only one square per restroom visit, except, of course, on those pesky occasions where 2 to 3 could be required.73

  While Crow actually graduated from college, unlike the aforementioned actor, one wonders how an educated person could come up with such a featherbrained idea. It was an absurd comment heard around the world. In the wake of her idiotic comments, she became the laughing stock of the nation virtually overnight. The public ridicule prompted Crow to claim, “it was a JOKE.”74

  I don’t buy it.

  This is a typical liberal trick. They tell us how we should live, they make foolhardy comments, and they offer harebrained solutions and the second someone calls them on it, they play the “it was a joke card.” Remember, Sheryl-use-one-square-Crow wasn’t doing a standup comedy routine at the time. She was in the middle of a “serious” effort to educate students about the catastrophic implications of global warming. It wasn’t the first time we heard her say something loony. It won’t be the last.

  Which brings us to yet another Hollywood idiot, Danny Glover, who forgot he’s an actor, not a scientist. Let’s set aside the fact that a number of scientists are good actors. Glover, who has no training in science, is suddenly an expert on the topic. In the wake of the earthquake that hit Haiti, here’s what Glover said of the people in Haiti: “They are all in peril because of global warming.”

  But wait, he envisions more damage on the horizon because of the failure of the UN Climate Summit in Copenhagen to throttle the threat of climate change:

  I hope we seize this particular moment because the threat of what happened to Haiti is the threat that could happen anywhere

  in the Caribbean to these island nations, you know. They’re all in peril because of global warming, they’re all in peril because of climate change … When we look back at what we did at the climate summit in Copenhagen, this is the response, this is what happens, you know what I’m saying? But we have to act now.75

  Not only are these actors ignoramuses, they’re outright hypocrites.

  Two examples will suffice. Compare the global warming rhetoric of Barbara “Babs” Streisand with how this singing yenta lives. On her website Babs talks about making a difference to stop global warming “by making simple, conscious decisions” to “conserve energy a
nd help protect the environment from further deterioration.” She then links to an article entitled, “Simple Things We Can All Do to Help Stop Global Warming.”76 Great. So what has this diva done to cut back on energy consumption?

  Nothing.

  Streisand and her husband live alone in a gated compound sporting five homes and a twelve-thousand-square-foot barn that’s larger than Al Gore’s mansion. Did I mention the barn is air-conditioned?77 And this yenta wants you to cut back on energy usage by switching to compact fluorescent light bulbs? Let’s set aside the fact that Babs once starred in a movie as a crazy person. I’m sure there was no typecasting involved. However, in real life, she must think we’re nuts to take her concern about global warming seriously.

  She has zero credibility.

  To stop global warming, maybe she could stop singing for starters.

  Take John Travolta who owns five airplanes, two of which are parked in the front yard of his home in Florida—one of which is a Boeing 707 four-engine behemoth. He owns a Lear jet and his own private runway. I have no problem with that. If he wants to double his fleet, more power to him. And yet it smacks of hypocrisy when he, like Al Goreleoni, tells us how we should live to minimize the impact on the environment, while ignoring his own preaching. Regarding global warming, Travolta said, “It is a very valid issue. I’m wondering if we need to think about other planets and dome cities.”78 In other words, things are getting so bad here on earth, we might need to move to another planet.

  I say, be my guest.

  When it comes to the Hollywood idiots, it’s “Do as I say, not as I play.”

  I understand how easy it is to be hoodwinked by Hollywood’s cheerleaders. On the surface, they sound convincing. Their “star power” makes them seem believable. It’s easy to forget that their lines have been scripted for them on the screen. In real life, they demonstrate a poverty of ideas, a poverty of values, and a poverty of integrity. If you allow their illogic to sell you on the global warming fiction, their poverty of the soul becomes yours.

  Which brings me to a final story.

  While working on this book, I took a break from the writing to attend to some other business. After driving across town, I parked my car in the underground garage of an older, towering building in San Francisco. I rang for the elevator and soon found myself standing next to three or four twenty-somethings. Each was neatly dressed, reasonably nice looking people. I punched the button for my floor, the doors closed, and up we went.

  I couldn’t help but notice that every one of my fellow travelers held a handheld device, maybe eight inches from their faces. They were staring into their little screens as though they were their personal oracle. I thought, “This is amazing. These people are completely oblivious of their surroundings.”

  They neither heard nor saw anybody else in the elevator.

  Me? I’m looking around, thinking I might exchange a few words, you know, as people do to pass the time. Especially since this wasn’t one of those supersonic elevators like the kind you’d ride up in the Willis Tower in Chicago. Sometimes I believe I could actually climb up the stairs faster than this thing was moving … 5th floor … 8th floor … 12th floor … still, not a word. As the elevator ascended, I wondered whether these people would even recognize danger when it approached them.

  They didn’t seem to know what world they were living in.

  I’m sure the last thing on their mind would be who the president really is, his Marxist-Leninist roots, or the fact that Congress was considering saddling them with more taxes under the guise of preventing global warming, or how fragile life itself really is. I realized, watching them work their little wheels on their BlackBerry’s without looking up once, that an evil government could literally take away their freedom and they wouldn’t even know it.

  That’s when a chilling thought struck me: Would they even care?

  As long as they could surf the Internet with their phone, would it matter that they were losing their fundamental freedoms? What’s more, I wondered which would be worse—to know the truth but to ignore it? Or, to be oblivious to the truth, to be ignorant of the reality that the world is collapsing around them?

  Thank God those aren’t the only two choices.

  Thank God some of us are still alert.

  Thank God there’s an awakening as the Tea Party movement demonstrates. The resistance to what this president is doing to foist trickle up poverty on the middle class via Climategate is growing.

  I can only pray it’s not too late to stop Obama’s hate.

  CHAPTER 7

  The Real Cost of Legalizing Illegals—It’s the Vote, Stupid!

  President Obama, Broken Borders are not a laughing matter. No one in Arizona is laughing. Do your job and secure the border.

  —Advertisement by Governor Jan Brewer1

  In the 21st century, we are defined not by our borders but by our bonds.

  —President Barack Obama2

  Entering the United States illegally has been a crime since 1929, and federal law affirms that it is a crime to be in this country illegally. In 2006, the U.S. Senate passed legislation authorizing the construction of a 700-mile fence along the Mexican border by a vote of 80 to 19. In 2010, Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano announced that she was freezing funding for the Secure Border Initiative Network, effectively abdicating the primary responsibility associated with her office: securing the borders of the United States.3

  This shouldn’t come as a complete surprise. Let’s set aside the fact that Napolitano is completely incompetent and should be fired. In this case, she was just reflecting the agenda of her boss, President Obama, who wants to erase the borders. That’s not hyperbole, that’s what Obama said to Mexican President Calderon during a Mexi-fest in the White House. Obama said, “Your business speaks to the truth of our time, in North America and the world. In the 21st Century, we are defined not by our borders but by our bonds, so I say to you and to the Mexican people, let us stand together. Let’s face the future together. Let us work together.”4

  While Napolitano and Obama were busy compromising and erasing our border, Arizona residents were increasingly besieged by illegals crossing their southern border. Mexicans smuggling drugs and illegal aliens into the country were becoming more desperate and violent. Phoenix had gotten the nickname “Kidnapping Capital of the USA,”5 and the tragic murder of Arizona rancher Robert Krentz, known as a Good Samaritan for the help he frequently gave to illegal immigrants,6 finally brought the consequences of the growing lawlessness along the border to a head.

  Tragically, after Robert Krentz was murdered, “deputies and U.S. Border Patrol agents tracked footprints from the crime scene nearly 20 miles to the Mexican line, border-policy critics concluded that the killer must be an illegal immigrant.”7 The very people he was helping appear to have been the ones who took his life. The state of Arizona, with the approval of 70 percent of its citizens, passed its own immigration enforcement law, essentially restating federal law but taking responsibility for protecting the border and monitoring the presence of illegal aliens in the state into their own hands.

  The response from the left was immediate, loud, and violent.

  The left has this habit of protesting common sense.

  Those speaking out and demonstrating against the new law resorted to willful misrepresentations of its contents, insisting that it gave law enforcement officers the right to arbitrarily approach anyone they pleased and demand to see identification. On those grounds, the protesters called those who supported the new law racists. President Obama, as he had done on the occasion of Professor Gates’ arrest, reacted intemperately. Before the bill had even been signed into law and certainly without his having read or been briefed on so much as a single word in the law, the president called it “poorly conceived” and “not the right way to go.”8

  In response to a question by Texas Republican Representative Ted Poe during a House Judiciary Committee hearing, Attorney General Eric Holder was force
d to admit that he had “not had a chance” to read the bill, despite the fact that he had called it unconstitutional and vowed to sic Justice Department attorneys on the legislation to prove it.9 Of course, the president and his leftist whiners also failed to mention that the House of Representatives had passed a bill that affirmed “the authority of state and local law enforcement officers to enforce federal immigration laws while in the course of their regular duties.”10

  In fact, the law is very straightforward.

  It clearly states that those involved in, or suspected of, committing a crime can be approached by law enforcement officers. If you’re suspected of having committed a crime, you’ll be asked for ID. If you can’t produce ID, you’ll be taken to jail. If it turns out you’re in the country illegally, you’ll be deported. What’s wrong with that? This procedure applies to both those in the country legally and those here illegally. For some reason, Obamanics can’t seem to understand that the law applies to Caucasians as well as Chicanos, Jews as well as Christians, those who have jobs and those who are unemployed. It discriminates against suspected criminals if it discriminates at all. In any case, those stopped under this law are entitled to due process. Further, citizens have recourse in that they can sue the state government if they feel the measures being taken aren’t aggressive enough.

  The circumstances that made passage of Arizona’s new illegal immigration law necessary contrast with how we often view those in the country illegally. Many Americans have a benign picture of illegal aliens. They view illegals as peacefully doing housework, gardening, and pool maintenance for well-to-do Americans in states along the U.S.-Mexico border. The problem is, while that may be true on some levels, not all illegal immigrants come to the United States to work.