Why Didn't NASA Warn us in Real Time about the near destruction?

.

Why is it our own government continues to hide the truth from us but expects our support? This article released today, July 25, 2012, details how close the Earth came on July 23, 2012 to be so fried by solar flares it might have knocked us back into the 18th century, a time before electricity.

Since NASA has satellites monitoring solar flares in real time why was no warning given of the biggest solar storm in modern history that might have caused a worldwide calamity?  If they are hiding such crucial facts from us what other truths is NASA hiding from us?

Here is the account two years too late by NASA.

Earth survived near-miss from 2012 solar storm: NASA

Washington (AFP) - Back in 2012, the Sun erupted with a powerful solar storm that just missed the Earth but was big enough to "knock modern civilization back to the 18th century," NASA said.

The extreme space weather that tore through Earth's orbit on July 23, 2012, was the most powerful in 150 years, according to a statement posted on the US space agency website Wednesday.

However, few Earthlings had any idea what was going on.

"If the eruption had occurred only one week earlier, Earth would have been in the line of fire," said Daniel Baker, professor of atmospheric and space physics at the University of Colorado.

Instead the storm cloud hit the STEREO-A spacecraft, a solar observatory that is "almost ideally equipped to measure the parameters of such an event," NASA said.


Scientists have analyzed the treasure trove of data it collected and concluded that it would have been comparable to the largest known space storm in 1859, known as the Carrington event.

A mass of swirling plasma rose up above the Sun, twisted and turned for almost a day, then broke away.  It also would have been twice as bad as the 1989 solar storm that knocked out power across Quebec, scientists said.

"I have come away from our recent studies more convinced than ever that Earth and its inhabitants were incredibly fortunate that the 2012 eruption happened when it did," said Baker.

The National Academy of Sciences has said the economic impact of a storm like the one in 1859 could cost the modern economy more than two trillion dollars and cause damage that might take years to repair.

Experts say solar storms can cause widespread power blackouts, disabling everything from radio to GPS communications to water supplies -- most of which rely on electric pumps.

They begin with an explosion on the Sun's surface, known as a solar flare, sending X-rays and extreme UV radiation toward Earth at light speed.

Hours later, energetic particles follow and these electrons and protons can electrify satellites and damage their electronics.


Next are the coronal mass ejections, billion-ton clouds of magnetized plasma that take a day or more to cross the Sun-Earth divide.

These are often deflected by Earth's magnetic shield, but a direct hit could be devastating.

There is a 12 percent chance of a super solar storm the size of the Carrington event hitting Earth in the next 10 years, according to physicist Pete Riley, who published a paper in the journal Space Weather earlier this year on the topic.

His research was based on an analysis of solar storm records going back 50 years.

"Initially, I was quite surprised that the odds were so high, but the statistics appear to be correct," said Riley.

"It is a sobering figure."      
.

Germany wins World Cup - a New Star emerges - Christ the Redeemer

.

A great soccer game decided the World Cup with the superior precision and physical stamina of Germany finally winning out in overtime.  Argentina had several chances to score and take the lead but exhaustion was evident after the grueling World Cup series.

My suggestion that FIFA allow unlimited substitution and perhaps add a few more players to the roster would go a long ways toward improving the speed and increasing the scoring in football since the entire game strategy right now is to be tied at the end of the match and win in overtime or kickoffs.

So many games in the final rounds ended this way a rule change might make it a lot more interesting to fans and certainly will eliminate the need for the Broadway theatrics of faking injuries to rest or try to trick the umpires into a penalty, either of which is downright unethical and hypocritical.

But in the end the true new superstar was none other than the amazing statue of Christ the Redeemer overlooking the stadium for the finals.  Here is the story on the star.

Christ the Redeemer, Portuguese Cristo Redentor,  colossal statue of Jesus Christ at the summit of Mount Corcovado, Rio de Janeiro, southeastern Brazil. It was completed in 1931 and stands 98 feet (30 metres) tall, its horizontally outstretched arms spanning 92 feet (28 metres). The statue, made of reinforced concrete clad in a mosaic of thousands of triangular soapstone tiles, sits on a square stone pedestal base about 26 feet (8 metres) high, which itself is situated on a deck atop the mountain’s summit. The statue is the largest Art Deco style sculpture in the world and is one of Rio de Janeiro’s most recognizable landmarks.

In the 1850s the Vincentian priest Pedro Maria Boss suggested placing a Christian monument on Mount Corcovado to honour Isabel, princess regent of Brazil and the daughter of Emperor Pedro II , although the project was never approved. In 1921 the Roman Catholic archdiocese of Rio de Janeiro proposed that a statue of Christ be built on the 2,310-foot (704-metre) summit, which, because of its commanding height, would make it visible from anywhere in Rio. Citizens petitioned Pres. Epitácio Pessoa to allow the construction of the statue on Mount Corcovado.

Permission was granted, and the foundation stone of the base was ceremonially laid on April 4, 1922—to commemorate the centennial on that day of Brazil’s independence from Portugal—although the monument’s final design had not yet been chosen. That same year a competition was held to find a designer, and the Brazilian engineer Heitor da Silva Costa was chosen on the basis of his sketches of a figure of Christ holding a cross in his right hand and the world in his left. In collaboration with Brazilian artist Carlos Oswald, Silva Costa later amended the plan; Oswald has been credited with the idea for the figure’s standing pose with arms spread wide. The French sculptor Paul Landowski, who collaborated with Silva Costa on the final design, has been credited as the primary designer of the figure’s head and hands. Funds were raised privately, principally by the church. Under Silva Costa’s supervision, construction began in 1926 and continued for five years. During that time materials and workers were transported to the summit via railway.

After its completion, the statue was dedicated on October 12, 1931. Over the years it has undergone periodic repairs and renovations, including a thorough cleaning in 1980, in preparation for the visit of Pope John Paul II to Brazil that year, and a major project in 2010, when the surface was repaired and refurbished. Escalators and panoramic elevators were added beginning in 2002; previously, in order to reach the statue itself, tourists climbed more than 200 steps as the last stage of the trip. In 2006, to mark the statue’s 75th anniversary, a chapel at its base was consecrated to Our Lady of Aparecida, the patron saint of Brazil.

. 

World Cup Finals - Can Pope Francis bring Argentina a Miracle on grass?

.

Pope Francis and Pope Benedict, it has been 600 years since there were two living Popes, and what are the odds of their home countries playing for the World Cup championship?  About as likely as Obama and Boehner sitting down and working out what is good for our country.

Yet here we are, the last day of the World Cup, and Argentina (Francis) is playing Germany (Benedict) for the world crown.  Who will win?  Germany is the heavy favorite after annihilating the home country Brazil in the semis 7-1 with discipline and precision we've come to expect from Germany.

As for Argentina, the odds of them winning are about as remote as the odds that some radical little people's priest from the poor slums of Argentina could ever be Pope.

As for me, I figure Divine Providence will always be full of surprises so don't be surprised if you see the Argentina flag flying from the Vatican this afternoon and the Argentina World Cup team visiting Rome.

Go Raggedy People!
.  

Eisenhower - Reagan - Romney - are we ready for a peacemaker?

.

Just after the war to end all wars, World War II, America needed a break, a time to rest, a moment in time when we focused on rebuilding our nation and not saving the world.  To accomplish that the public turned to someone who was not a typical politician, was not partisan and believed in America before political party.

They elected 63 year old Dwight Eisenhower in 1952 and for 8 years we got peace and prosperity.

Later when the American public was fed up with Viet Nam, student riots, civil rights riots, and the capture of 58 Americans in the Iranian revolution once again we longed for a time of peace and prosperity.

They elected 70 year old Ronald Reagan in 1980 and for 8 years we got peace and prosperity.

As we near the 2016 presidential election once again Americans are tired of the decades long wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, the world dependence on America, and a tragic economic collapse and painfully long recovery.

If history repeats itself and the latest polls indicate there is a high probability, then the American public will elect the 70 year old Mitt Romney and will get 8 years of peace and prosperity.

Americans long for peace and prosperity.  They long for an end to vicious partisan bickering in our capitol.  They are fed up with the Democrats blaming the Republicans and Republicans blaming the Democrats for everything that doesn't happen in Washington.

They long for a fair minded, proven, successful individual who has achieved success not as a politician but as a businessman, as a champion for non-profit causes, as a genuine family man and someone who can actually talk to the other political party members.

We long for someone not beholden to the special interests and lobbyists who control Washington, our politicians and our government.  Of all the potential candidates for 2016 only Mitt Romney meets the criteria.

He was battle tested in the most vicious and unethical presidential campaign in history.  Over a billion dollars was spent to destroy him and his career and looking back, the American public pretty well recognizes they made a serious mistake in electing Obama.

Mitt Romney handled the quagmire with dignity, class and a commitment to family and religious values not apparent in his opposition.  He handled defeat with grace recognizing that in spite of the tremendous political mudslinging and the avalanche of money on the part of Obama, not to mention he was the sitting president with the resources of the entire federal government at his disposal, Romney only lost by 3.9%.

Only about 58% of the registered voters turned out they were so fed up by politics.  If 1.96% more had turned out and voted for Romney he would have been president.  But Divine Providence surely had other things in mind like giving Obama a chance to govern and he has pretty much squandered that opportunity.

Since Obama is persona non grata to even Democrats who are running from association with him, he is most likely a non-factor for the rest of his term and could be more liability than asset to any Democrat running.

Now Hillary Clinton, the only Democrat aspirant to the presidency, having declared the Clinton legacy right to the Oval Office, has blocked any Democrat from even exploring the waters.  In fact her recent book tour meant to pave the way for her coronation back fired and Hillary has already lost 15% of her favorability rating this year.

But the delusional left continue to make hay of her power.  So let's look at the real numbers and not the rarefied raging of the left.

In the New Hampshire poll this week, that state being one of the first major tests for presidential hopefuls, Hillary led good old Joe, Biden that is, 59% - 14%.  That doesn't say much for Obama's sidekick and the Clinton groupies declared her the winner of the primary, the nomination and the vote for president although we are still 2 1/2 years away.

Of course after the run of bad luck the liberals experienced with the CHOSEN ONE Barack Obama, whose popularity is in a freefall since he is caught in a time warp and still running against George Bush in a presidential campaign back in 2008 rather than governing the nation he was elected to represent, so the fickle left bank has put their money behind Hillary.

They forget she is no more left than her husband wild Bill whose political platform was what ever was necessary to look like he was doing something and avoiding impeachment.  His major accomplishments came out of the Republican playbook and he, like Obama and his wife, long ago sold out to Goldman Sachs and that dastardly gang from Wall Street.

English betting odds for president

The really revealing data in the poll came when Democrats were asked who they would vote for if the primary election were held today.

In January, Clinton brought in 73% support among Democrats and Democratic-leaning independents, according to a Washington Post/ABC News poll.

But, in Thursday's survey, only 13% of Democratic respondents says they've definitely made up their minds about 2016, and 77% said they're still trying to decide.

So Hillary has been on the national scene in Democrats face since 1992, was First Lady for 8 years, U.S. Senator, presidential candidate and then Secretary of State and only 13% of Democrats have made up their minds about who they will support?

Polls can be interpreted many ways but when 77% of the Democrats don't know who they want as candidate at this late stage in her career, the mythical Clinton stranglehold on the Democrat party seems to be fading in the mists of reality.

On the Republican side there are a number of good candidate bunched together.  But maybe the public does not think they are ready to be president yet.  Republican voters in New Hampshire have anything but a clear-cut GOP nominee in mind.

New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie leads other potential GOP White House contenders at 19%. He's followed by Sen. Rand Paul of Kentucky at 14% and former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush at 11%. Sen. Marco Rubio of Florida and 2008 GOP presidential candidate Mike Huckabee tie in the poll at 8%.

And then there is the Romney factor.  More and more voters are starting to realize the country might have been better served by Mitt Romney than Barack Obama.  Certainly there was no question of the vastly superior Romney experience and credentials.  And the latest poll in New Hampshire shows just how powerful the only non-candidate for president is at this time.

The poll shows that if Mitt Romney, the 2012 GOP presidential nominee, decides to take another stab at the Republican nomination, he would start with a big lead over the rest of the field.

New Hampshire is the second stop on the presidential nomination calendar and hosts the first-in-the-nation primary.

But if Mr. Romney changes his mind and decides to run again, 39 percent of likely primary voters said they would vote for him, with Mr. Christie and Mr. Paul tying in a distance second with 7 percent.

Not only does Romney offer all the strengths Obama lacked like leadership, the ability to work with Democrats when he was governor of Democrat controlled Massachusetts, a real religious foundation, a strong family life, but he is a genuinely nice person, something rare in politics today.

I sense a mighty movement to draft Romney and elect him as the next Eisenhower/Reagan peacemaker who will restore prestige to the office of president, will return class to politics and regain faith in our foreign affairs from the rest of the disheartened world.

. 

Obamaville July 7, 2014 - Who can run faster - away from the president?

.

The Obama Foreign Policy Process

So here in the political capital (yes the spelling is right) of America there is a new game in town and it is who can run the fastest away from the policies of President Barack Obama. You might have noticed that the Obama favorability ratings have been in free fall since his re-election in 2012.

Now that his negatives have passed his positives and the people of America seem to be wondering just what it is he actually stands for there seems to be a stampede of liberals, people and institutions, running away from any responsibility for the Obama presidency.

Once upon a time such turncoats were known as hypocrites and scorned but since the list of hypocrites includes people and institutions who were once darlings of the left I guess we have to consider them enlightened.

With no apparent concept of the mechanics of the policy development and implementation process and having been abandoned by all those Obama mouthpieces who used to be around and told him what to think and say, you might say who ran interference with the media, the Obama administration is clearly adrift when it comes to coherent messaging and purpose.

There are times when presidential decisions seem to be made with an Ouija Board rather than any decision-making process.  And at times it seems as if the Dark Side is controlling the Board.  Such is the mystery of the presidential policy process.

As for the runners away:

Hillary Clinton - Her calculated ambitions to lock everyone out of the Democratic nomination for president keep running into speed bumps when it comes to her relationship with Obama.  She did lose to him then agree to be a loyal partner as his Secretary of State.  It has come back to haunt her stumbling presidential coronation as the Obama foreign policy, which she directed, has collapsed in the eyes of the public.  It will take a diversion as good as husband Bill Clinton pulled off to avoid impeachment when he was president to get out of responsibility for the Obama foreign affairs fiasco.

Bill Clinton - Lo and behold the other Clinton has also gone silent on what used to be his lukewarm support for the guy who beat his wife in the 2008 election.  Let's face it, after the rough and tumble primary it was probably the endorsement by Bill Clinton and his work to get Obama elected that propelled Barack into the presidency.  The same effort was critical to getting Obama re-elected.  Now Bill has to make all that go away to help his wife.

Harry Reid & Nancy Pelosi - The Democrat leaders of the Senate and House never seem to mention Barack Obama as if that would make him fade away in the minds of the public.  But there is a massive record of all the times they served as water boy and girl to the president, defended his actions, and supported his failures during the past six years so in their cases silence is golden.

The chairperson of the Democratic National Committee, DNC, U.S. Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz of Florida - She was handpicked by Obama to defend him against the dastardly Republicans, and also seems to have adopted the "out of mind out of sight" approach to public relations.  Once upon a time her face was all over the media defending her president but those days seem long gone and after the exasperation it must have caused her it came not a moment too soon.

The New York Times and The Washington Post - These Citadels of liberal Main Street media have changed their tune from Obama apologists to nitpickers about the failure of the president to live up to his liberal agenda promises.  In particular they seem surprised and upset about the massive failure in the Obama foreign relations.

Stay tuned because we still have 2 1/2 more years to report on.

.