Not a single person showed up at the Georgetown waterfront Tuesday for a climate change agenda event put on by Organizing for Action, the shadowy nonprofit advocacy group born out of President Obama’s 2012 campaign, the NRCC wrote in its blog.
14 Responses to OFA Gets Zero Attendance for Climate Change Rally
OFA Gets Zero Attendance for Climate Change Rally | Global Climate Scam | Telcomil Intl Products and Services -
September 29, 2013
[…] See on http://www.globalclimatescam.com […]
I think the wind is finally going out of the sails on this whole AGW/Climate Change/Global Warming/Climate Disruption BS. It’s about freakin time too. It’s really been over since Climategate, but the rabid die-hards just could not let it go. I think most people are smart enough to see, even if it is subconsciously, that all of the predictions have been about as accurate as a doomsday cult prophesy.
I think there are still going to be some rabid die-hards that will cling to it for a while, like the pet rock, or polyester suits, but it really is on it’s way out and will go out with a whimper.
Check out the reports from the National Academy:
They have a publication that goes a long way to explain what is happening to our climate entitled: Climate Change: Evidence, Impacts Choices. Please check it out.
p.s. Have you seen what is going on with FreedomWorks these days? Astroturf to the max. Dick Armey walked away with a reported $8 million. Also, I like the “shadowy” reference you used regarding the OFA. Classic!
Are you kidding? Why would I want to go “check out” a website that is run by Leftists that are completely in the tank for AGW? All of their articles are based on computer modeling, and there is even an article on computer modeling! You look at that publication you mentioned “Climate Change: Evidence, Impacts Choices”, how much you want to bet the “evidence” they point to is computer model projections? Which reason would dictate that the “impacts, and choices” they talk about are all suppositions derived from the computer model “evidence”.
You go, read it. If I’m wrong, and the “evidence” is from observational hard data, and they have some actual, tangible, factual examples of “impacts” that are actually happening, I’ll eat my hat.
And what is going on with FreedomWorks? I have no idea. Maybe you could post a link to show just what you are talking about?
And what is OFA? Why does it still exist? It was/is part of our fearless leader’s political campaign. Well, he won! So why are they still collecting money? If you can’t answer that, then I would say that “shadowy” is probably an apt description.
OFA was once the Obama campaign committee. Then it was “Organizing for America,” and now they’ve changed their name again to “Organizing for Action.”
It’s still Obama’s political committee and he’s a lame duck. So what are they doing? In agreement with “Shadowy.”
Why shouldn’t he still have his campaign committee going? All he does is campaign. I mean, he’s just doing his best to, you know, look out for the American people. He’s working hard, and someday, he might actually become the President. But, gosh darn it, those evil, gol darned Republican meenies, who control everything, won’t let him help us! Those bastages!
Shadowy, right out in the open… What Dick Armey did to the Teaparty (brilliantly, and evilly co-opted it) was shadowy. Right out in the open too, but shadowy for sure. John John John, don’t even try to post anything other than the straight and narrow denier data here. It’s dismissed out of hand, usually, as with the above “it’s Leftist! and so there” routine. Neil does a good job now overall, hoeing (whoring?) the line, and if not for him this site would be nothing. Literally. Paranoia runs deep in these here warming waters.
Oh, I think you give me way too much credit. I just post comments. This site is Dan McGrath’s 100%. Funny that you don’t even mention him when talking about the site. Give credit where credit is due.
Once again you disagree with even a simple compliment from me. Imagine that.
That was a compliment!? Oh s**t, sorry. I got thrown off by the whole whoring thing, and the bit about paranoia. Thank you, thank you ever so much for that “compliment”. I bet you really score with the ladies with compliments like that. I can see it now. “Wow, that dress makes you look like a whore”! Or, “Hey, those new eyeglass frames make you look paranoid”! Yeah, score zero.
I see you still haven’t mastered anger-management. Relapse, luckily, is part of the process. Rock on grasshopper.
Did I sound angry? I think you are confusing sarcasm for anger. My point, boiled down, is that using terms like “whoring” and “paranoid” doesn’t exactly engender high confidence in your meaning being complimentary. Old Pal.
And you’re sure you’re not angry?? Whew. I should have known better, you don’t get angry, ever. You sure do like to argue however, almost pathologically. Missed your calling as a politician, or something.
Is this redistribution of deceived audiences?