As the Denver Post’s Jason Blevins reported yesterday (March 4):
Rocky Mountain National Park ranked as the sixth-biggest loser among the parks and monuments shuttered during the federal government’s closure last fall.
The 16-day shutdown cost Colorado’s busiest national park $10.9 million, with visitation plunging 73 percent in October compared with the previous three Octobers, according to a report released Monday by the National Park Service.
The pain spilled into Estes Park, which relies mightily on park visitors spending in hotels, restaurants and shops …
And the Denver Business Journal’s Caitlin Hendee:
NPS also reported Monday that the 16-day government shutdown last October resulted in 7.88 million fewer park visits nationwide than would otherwise be expected for an estimated loss of about $414 million.
That closure — and the prior flooding in Colorado, damaging many roads — resulted in a double-whammy last fall for Estes Park, the gateway city to Rocky Mountain park. Estes Park hotels had a decrease in occupancy rates by over 50 percent after the September floods…
“The flood impact [was] difficult for our residents and businesses and the closure of Rocky Mountain National Park was a huge economic blow just as we were pulling together toward recovery,” said Estes Park Mayor Bill Pinkham in an announcement last October.
Last year’s shutdown of the federal government by Republicans seeking to kill or delay implementation of the Affordable Care Act, most observers agree, was an enormous political miscalculation on the part of those who supported it. That’s why vulnerable Republicans like Colorado’s Rep. Mike Coffman were seeking an exit–or at least rhetorical cover —only a few days into the crisis. At the same time, Colorado’s congressional delegation was attempting to win federal flood relief for communities affected by last year’s historic Front Range floods. The combination of these two events, in particular stories that suggested flood relief was being delayed by the shutdown, worsened the political morass in which Colorado Republicans found themselves.
And now we know the shutdown did real economic damage to Colorado communities who depend on our national parks and monuments to bring in business. Even after the state paid out of pocket to reopen Rocky Mountain National Park, the shutdown had already resulted in thousands of paying tourists changing their plans. In answer to all of the hypothetical (and often fictional) economic pain Republicans insist is about to be visited on the people of America from “Obamacare,” here is real pain. Inflicted needlessly on real people.
By the four guys you see at the upper right of this post: Reps. Cory Gardner, Mike Coffman, Scott Tipton, and Doug Lamborn. Gardner and Coffman are now among the highest-profile Republican candidates in the nation. Polling has consistently shown that the public blame House Republicans for the shutdown.
Folks, if the absolutely devastating attack ads that write themselves from this story aren’t obvious to you yet, politics just may not be your thing. Messaged right, this is a potent counterattack on “pro business” Republicans like Gardner. It’s harder, or at least it should be harder, to call yourself “pro business” after costing real businesses in your own state millions of dollars.
Posted by Gypsy Chief
Published February 22, 2014 in Colorado Pols. Written by Club Twitty.
Colorado stands to become the first state to impose regulations on the sometimes copious amounts of methane that leaks during all stages of natural gas development and production. Methane is a super potent greenhouse gas, contributing to climate change which in turn increases the likelihood and severity of extreme weather events from super fires to thousand year floods, from extreme cold to deadly heat.
Now the silly pundits over at Fox News like to pretend that cold in the Winter means climate change is not happening, or that environmentalists are trying to fool America by referring to it as such rather than as Global Warming.
Global warming, global weirding, and climate change are different terms that describe related parts of what is happening right now to our planet—Lifeship Earth.
Not so long ago the Natural gas industry loved talking about climate change, presumably because it was seen as a way to sell more of their product.
— Tisha Schuller (@tishaschuller) August 15, 2013
That was Then, This is Now
That was almost a year ago, before all the talk of regulating methane leakage and a deal hammered out to address this serious issue between some environmental groups, the State of Colorado, and three major natural gas developers operating in their Colorado energy colony: Canadian giant EnCana, and Texas-based Noble and Anadarko.
The damaging, dangerous and sometimes debilitating impacts from oil and gas development has long been a battle in the hinterlands, which was mostly ignored at the State House. But once the fracking wars hit the Front Range people and politicians suddenly took some notice. Now concerns over all aspects of fracking, drilling and development have exploded onto the scene like a poorly sealed wellhead in a Pennsylvania shale field.
And now that the Colorado Oil and Gas industry is being asked to actually DO SOMETHING about their out-sized contribution to greenhouse gas emission — rather than just benefitting from the need to address climate change — they have flip flopped.
Joined by a few majors like Chevron and ExxonMobil, the Colorado Oil and Gas Association — headed up by Tisha ‘I Will Act on Climate’ Schuller — has suddenly decided there is no need to act after all. More studies perhaps on this whole ozone thing? Why bother stopping pollution now (on the Western Slope) when we have not yet fouled up the air, let’s wait until we do! And why should old equipment that has not yet been shown to be leaking methane need tested at all? This is the line being taken by these scions to the world’s richest industry. It might actually cost almost 0.5% in profit to do so!
You May Think I’m Cheap, But It Had Melted Cheese …
I had pizza last night and I understand it regularly ranks as among America’s favorite food. Some significant percentage of American men eat pizza every day according to one survey. And all manner of astroturf firms have popped up spending cash on slick PR with pictures of pretty places no well would ever go, telling lies (like the need to use water from, well water sources, is a myth), and generally sowing confusion about the safety of fracking.
But then something happens, an old badly plugged well gets frack hit and sends toxic spew into the shared environment. Or a well explodes into flames, raging for days, and requiring a specialized team flown in from a thousands of miles distant to control. Or the CEO of the world’s richest energy company decides that ‘Fracking is Fine for Thee but not for Me’ and all that external affairs money evaporates like VOCs on a hot day into a big, choking cloud of nonsense.
The very companies pledging they are not part of the problem and thus need no such rules to protect public health and the environment — firms like Chevron or ExxonMobil — are engaged in a smoke and mirrors campaign: look over here! (Not over there).
Even as wells explode (have a free pizza!) and their CEOs file suits to block fracking near their own homes (wanting to preserve the rural character, and worried about the decline in property values). Just as the primary lobbyist organization in the state, COGA, reveals its inherently duplicitous nature.
So here is the question: What will the Colorado Air Quality Control Commission do? Will it listen to Coloradans that turned out in overwhelming numbers to ask that they Act for Climate (and strong statewide air quality rules), or can it be distracted with coupons and lies?
Posted by Gypsy Chief
Published in The Organic Prepper on February 5, 2014. Written by Daisy Luther.
It’s beyond dispute that the United States is facing a water crisis. On the West Coast, where much of our produce is raised, an on-going drought has California governor Jerry Brown hinting that water conservation efforts might soon become mandatory. On the East Coast, the water is plentiful but is polluted by chemical spills, as seen in West Virginia and radioactive leaks, as seen in South Carolina.
Two years ago, Michael Snyder wrote about the endless drought of 2012, calling it the largest natural disaster in American history. He predicted a water shortage that will change the lives of every person on the planet, and he was right – we are living his prediction right now.
If you aren’t already storing water, it is absolutely your top preparedness priority at this time. Forget, for now, about the beans and rice – how are you going to cook them without any water? From a survival aspect, you absolutely must focus on a long-term source of water. All of your best laid plans will be for naught if you don’t have water rights on your property, a collection system for rainfall, and second and third sources to rely on, as well as reliable purification systems. Safe municipal water (although with the inclusion of all the toxic additives ’safe’ is debatable) will soon be a thing of the past.
One thing that people don’t always stop to consider is exactly how much water they use each day. Everyone in the preparedness realm knows the adage about 1 gallon per person per day, but that is only the tip of the iceberg. It doesn’t include the vast amount of water we customarily use for hygiene purposes. This video shows how easily the average American goes through at least 100 gallons of water per day.
Clearly, in an off-grid scenario, many of the activities in that video won’t be possible. But what if it is a slightly different situation – perhaps your water supply is rationed and limited by the public utility companies? You’re still going to want clean clothes, clean dishes, and a clean body. You’ll want to be able to flush your toilet without using half of your day’s “ration” of water.
Here are a few suggestions for reducing the amount of water you use on a daily basis. The list is by no means comprehensive, and not all of these solutions will work for everyone’s situation.
First, take notes from those who live without running water. Just think: If you had to physically acquire every drop of water used in your home, whether by pumping it from a well or lugging it from a water source, you’d already be taking many of these lower-tech steps.
- Reuse cooking water – if you have boiled pasta or vegetables, use this water for making soup. You will have retained some of the nutrients and flavor from the first thing you cooked in the water.
- Landscape with plants that grow naturally in your area. They should require little in the way of additional watering.
- Grow organic. Chemical fertilizers can increase a plant’s need for water.
- Wash some clothing by hand – it will use far less water than your washing machine. Be sure and save the water for other uses.
- When shaving, rinse your razor in a cup instead of under running water.
- Skip the dishwasher and do the dishes by hand.
- Instead of running water over each dish to rinse, fill one side of the sink or a basin with rinse water containing a splash of white vinegar. Running water uses up to 4 gallons per minute.
- Use a glass of water to brush your teeth instead of running the tap the entire time. Running water uses up to 4 gallons per minute.
- Use an organic mulch in your garden to help retain moisture.
- Wash produce in a basin of water instead of under running water.
- When you clean out your fish tank, reserve the water for your garden. Your veggies will love the nutrient boost!
- Harvest rainwater for your garden.
These next options assume that running water is not an issue, but that you still wish to conserve.
- Use a brick, a filled plastic bottle, or a float booster to fill space in the back of the toilet tank. This reduces the amount of water used in each flush.
- Speaking of flushing, you may have heard the rhyme, “If it’s yellow, let it mellow. If it’s brown, flush it down.”
- Devise a gray water catchment system for your shower, your washing machine, and your kitchen. This water can be used for flushing, watering plants, and for cleaning.
- Take shorter showers — try to reduce them to 5 minutes — this can save up to 1000 gallons per month! If you can’t handle a 5 minute shower, every 2 minutes you shorten your shower time by can save approximately 150–200 gallons per month.
- Install a water-saving shower head.
- When you have a shower, plug the tub. Use the water you collect for handwashing laundry. (See the next suggestion!)
- If you do use a dishwasher, run it only when it’s completely full — this can save you 1000 gallons per month.
- If you drop a tray of ice cubes, pop them into a pet dish or into your potted plants.
- When washing your hands, dip them in a basin of water, lather up, then rinse under running water. Running water uses up to 4 gallons per minute.
- Upgrade your faucets with inexpensive aerators with flow restrictors.
- Use a nozzle on your hose so that you are only putting water where you want it, not spraying it uselessly as you walk to the garden.
- Repair leaks. At the rate of one drip per second, that adds up to 5 gallons per day … literally down the drain.
- If you are buying new items for your home, opt for those which use water more efficiently, like front-loading washing machines and low flush toilets.
This isn’t about bowing to the restrictions of Agenda 21 — this is about adapting to survive in a world where resources may one day not be as readily available as they are today.
What methods do you use to conserve water? Have you considered how to make limited water meet all of your needs if the current crisis continues?
Daisy Luther is a freelance writer and editor. Her website, The Organic Prepper, offers information on healthy prepping, including premium nutritional choices, general wellness and non-tech solutions. You can follow Daisy on Facebook and Twitter, and you can email her at firstname.lastname@example.org
Posted by Gypsy Chief
Published February 5, 2014 in Transition Voice as Business wants Obama to act without Congress for clean energy. Written by Vicki Lipski.
When it comes to climate and energy, some business leaders are catching on, even in the United States.
On January 21, a report authored, in part, by over 100 academics, energy experts, government officials, and business leaders called upon the president to address climate change by taking measures that do not require congressional approval.
Spearheaded by the Center for the New Energy Economy at Colorado State University, the report grew out of a meeting convened last March, attended by the president along with 14 corporate and private sector leaders. These leaders spoke for hundreds of like-minded individuals who want to reshape the country’s energy policy.
Congress out of the picture
The resulting 207-page report [pdf] contains around 200 recommendations regarding the use of executive authority to enact the climate change action plan the president announced last June without need for any action by Congress. Former Colorado Governor Bill Ritter released the report, briefing cabinet officials and senior policy staff whose focus is energy and climate policy.
The report recommends that officials concentrate on five main areas:
- Doubling energy efficiency
- Financing renewable energy
- Producing natural gas more responsibly
- Helping utilities adapt to the country’s changed energy landscape
The report highlights measures that every federal agency can take to mitigate global warming and its effects.
Stupid is as stupid does
Unfortunately, the White House still has a goal of only a 17 percent reduction in carbon emissions below 2005 levels by 2020, a shockingly stupid target, considering how much lower than that emissions need to be. This easily achievable goal is mere window dressing, the only unserious aspect of the report.
Specific recommendations made in the report include working with electric utilities and regulators to update regulations that serve as a barrier to clean energy technology, and reforming the tax code in order to make it fairer for private investors who wish to provide capital for clean energy development.
Better than “All of the Above”
One of the report’s most interesting suggestions calls for a federal process to account for the full costs of various energy choices, including health impacts. By establishing these costs, the administration would be better able to select not only the most effective choice, insofar as the environment is concerned, but the most cost-effective choice, as well.
Posted by Gypsy Chief
This YouTube Video was produced by Fort Collins City Council member Ross Cunniff. The calculator was produced by Scott Denning, Montfort Professor of Atmospheric Science at Colorado State University.
Fort Collins Community Action Network is asking citizens to post information about this on Facebook and Twitter.
The Fort Collins City Council will review the City’s community-wide greenhouse gas emissions reduction goal in 2014.
The Science Advisor of the Fort Collins Sustainability Group (FCSG) has developed a Carbon Dioxide and Climate Calculator to help council members, city residents, and others investigate how quickly and how deeply greenhouse gas emissions must be cut in order to avoid “dangerous interference with the climate system.”
Posted by Gypsy Chief
Slackware 14.1 review
By Rob Elemans November 12, 2013 Linux, Slackware 20 Comments
Slackware 14.1 was released on November 7th, 2013. I’d been waiting for this release. In this post, I’ll explain why, and what I thought of it after installing it and using it for a few days.
Balance of this great review is here.
Posted by The GNUinator
Published in Campaign for America’s Future blog on December 6, 2013. By Dave Johnson.
This is an urgent warning that the country’s big-corporate elite are about to try to push something called “Fast Track” Trade Promotion Authority through Congress, in preparation for pushing through the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) corporate “investor rights” agreement. (Note that I did not write “trade agreement” because most of TPP is something else entirely.)
People need to “get it” about just how dangerous this is. Fast Track and the current TPP — as it appears to be negotiated — should be as much of an electoral test for progressives as Social Security is. We have to make Fast Track a line that cannot be crossed. This is all about democracy vs big-corporate dominance of our economy and society.
- Fast Track is about bypassing democracy and Constitutional government so the giant multinationals can do a huge PR effort to push this TPP agreement through. Fast Track means Congress can’t make changes to the agreement and has to pass it in a rush — so democracy and our representatives can’t meddle with what the Serious People have laid out for us.
- The agreement itself is also about getting democracy and government power out of the way of the big corporations. It actually sets (certain) corporate (“investor”) interests above the law of any country. For example, word has leaked that TPP negotiators are arguing over whether to prevent countries from running anti-smoking campaigns, because this interferes with tobacco-company profits. One side says this is going too far and they should “carve out” tobacco from the agreement, the other side says carving out tobacco sets a precedent of allowing governments to protect their citizens from other things corporations might want to profit from. This should tell you all you need to know about why Fast Track must not pass, enabling them to push TPP through with no changes.
- Fast Track is about continuing a rigged process designed to come to certain conclusions to benefit a few people. TPP was negotiated between corporations by people in government who can leave government to receive lucrative paychecks from the corporations. An agreement negotiated without other stakeholders at the table means those stakeholders are ON the table. Labor, human rights, consumer groups, environmental groups were not at the table, only LARGE and already-dominant corporate interests. (This also means that smaller companies, potential innovators and competitors, etc. are at a disadvantage.) This is really about the elites and billionaires who own things now locking in their dominance.
- A trade agreement doesn’t have to be bad. A real “trade” agreement could lift the world’s economy, instead of making exploitation of labor and the environment into a competitive advantage. (“Shut up our we’ll move your job out of the country, too.”) But with all of the stakeholders at the table, we could work out a way around the low wages and lack of environmental protections in some countries. (Make it a trade violation to say “Shut up our we’ll move your job out of the country, too.” Make it a trade violation to lower costs by allowing pollution. Make it a trade violation to block union organizing or deny unemployment benefits or do other things that push wages down. Make it a trade violation to have a continuing trade surplus.)
- Also, a good part of TPP is that it is an agreement that works out how to confront China. Unfortunately the current process appears to make this about the billionaires who are threatened by China, not about democracies getting together to overcome the way China turns a lack of worker and environmental protections into a competitive advantage.
- Note that we don’t really know what is in TPP because it is secret. There have been leaks and things do not look good. But the fact that We the People haven’t even SEEN it should by itself mean that Fast Track must not be allowed to pass. How can we agree to “fast track” a process to pass an agreement we have not been allowed to see?
~ Dave Johnson
Dave has more than 20 years of technology industry experience. His earlier career included technical positions, including video game design at Atari and Imagic. He was a pioneer in design and development of productivity and educational applications of personal computers. More recently he helped co-found a company developing desktop systems to validate carbon trading in the US.
Related: TPP: Corporate power tool of the 1% via Public Citizen.
Related: It’s Time to End the Secrecy Surrounding TPP via Huffington Post.
Related: Why the TPP matters to the Internet and IP via ZDNet.
Related: Expose the TPP portal via Public Citizen.
Related: Happily ever NAFTA: | Grist New trade pact could boost corporations and harm environment.
Posted by Gypsy Chief
It’s a good day to write about climate science and climate denial. A typhoon of historically unprecedented strength hit the Philippines last weekend, with reports of 2,000 to 2,500 dead. Homes and lives are devastated, corpses hang from trees and litter the rubble of houses and buildings.
At the UN Climate Talks being held in Warsaw this week, the lead negotiator from the Philippines, Naderev Saño, has announced that he will fast for the duration of the conference, “until a meaningful outcome is in sight” — a direct challenge to the negotiators to do more than talk.
Typhoon Haiyan was caused by climate change. Superstorm Sandy was caused by climate change. If we don’t stop climate change, we can expect these “Hundred Year Storms” to become an annual or semi-annual occurrence.
Imagine you are next, because you are.
Let’s review the science
Here’s the science in a nutshell: As I write this the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change has just released its fifth report. Comprised of 2000 of the world’s top climatologists, it’s the most thoroughly researched, compiled and peer-reviewed scientific document of all time. The IPCC’s consensus tells us that the Earth is warming at a rate unseen at any time in human history, and that this is due to human activity of burning fossil fuels and releasing unprecedented amounts of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere.
We have raised the surface temperature of the Earth by 0.8 degrees Celsius (1.4F), and we have raised the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere from 270 parts per million to 400ppm. While the Earth has warmed before, and in some cases quite rapidly, each such drastic warming was accompanied by a mass extinction event.
This human-forced warming is causing storms of unprecedented strength (Sandy). It’s causing drought and therefore wildfires. It’s causing flooding (warm air holds more moisture). The ocean is not only warming but acidifying due to increased CO2, causing shelled creatures to dissolve (at the bottom of the food chain, therefore affecting all level of ocean life). Glaciers are melting at an alarming rate, and those who depend on their fresh water will soon be facing famine.
Meanwhile, despite amazing technological process in the technology and feasibility of renewable energy (solar and wind), the amount of fossil fuels burnt continues to rise at a rate of 2-3% each year.
It seems we are not facing this. We are in denial.
Climate science deniers, big-time
The fight against true climate deniers gets ugly quick. I stay out of it unless I’m directly challenged, and in that case I pull out my debater’s knowledge of types of false logic and try to precisely name what I’m hearing. But the sort of people who turn up in the comments section of every “green article” in the news aren’t going to be dissuaded by logic, and aren’t worth much of an activist’s time.
Learn to recognize a few of the climate deniers’ tricks, point them out, and be done with them:
- The Appeal to Hypocrisy: Climate deniers love to accuse believers and activists of being part of the problem. “How did you get to that protest?”, they sneer, “did you walk?” Their point is that unless you have cleansed your life of all fossil fuels you are part of the problem, and therefore nor qualified to criticize it.
- The Argument from Irrelevant Authority: There are a few scientists out there who still deny climate change is human-caused, deny that it is happening, or otherwise trivialize it. I think there are three or maybe even five. Most of them are not climatologists and many of them are in the employ of fossil fuel companies. A simple fact is that 97% of climatologists now agree that climate change is happening, is caused by us, and is powerfully destructive.
- The Ad Hominem Attack: This will be a character assassination or an attack on your intelligence or common sense, or some other form of personal critique irrelevant to the topic. Just call it out and walk away from the argument. That’s abuse.
Climate science deniers, workaday (That’s us!)
The denial that concerns me more is present in liberals and centrists, is subtle, is nobody’s fault. Much of it comes from the construct of our minds, and the rest from some very deliberate cultural manipulation.
As humans we often believe that we are special: Beloved of God, or privileged by our superior mental and creative capacities. Do we think that our capacity to innovate technology can always outpace our inadvertent destruction of the natural world? Do we believe that nature is self-healing and hugely tolerant of our presence? It’s useful to contemplate these questions without answering them too quickly or reactively.
Climate change is happening in real time now. All dress rehearsals are over. Not a week goes by without the occurrence of an unprecedented event. This fall, Colorado was hit by wildfires and floods simultaneously. Arctic ice-cover hit an all-time low last summer (2012) that left scientists saying we will definitely see an ice-free summer Arctic in our lifetimes. Temperature records are broken every day in some part of the world. The monarch butterfly was scarcely seen in New England this past summer at all. Honeybee populations are devastated nationwide, and we face the loss of our main crop pollinator – a fact that alone threatens famine.
To not see this is a major failure of attention. It’s not deliberate, but it’s also not accidental. It may be a symptom of the gradual disengagement from the natural world that has been a feature of western life over the last century (in children they’re starting to call this “nature deficit disorder”). It may very well be encouraged and even staged by the corporate world, which wants us for its own purposes.
(I do mean that to sound impersonal–I don’t believe there is truly a corporate conspiracy guided by any human hands; but just a vast web of inattention to certain consequences of deifying acquisition.)
Many goodhearted people fall into something like bargaining with Death. They try to purify their own lives, to “go green” in a variety of ways from changing their light bulbs to buying a Prius to insulating their homes to biking to work to putting up solar panels to going “off grid. There’s a lot of wisdom and good in these actions, but because of their personal and isolated nature, they won’t solve climate change, which is caused largely by a systemic reliance on an unsustainable and ruinous source of energy (fossil fuels). The biggest polluters probably rejoice in our sense of personal guilt. It keeps us busy and off their doorsteps.
The math doesn’t work. Voluntary measures to reduce consumption are not going to solve the problem of climate change. They do nothing to persuade industry polluters to change their ways, and this is the key to turning back the death march of increased CO2 in the atmosphere. I am concerned, as well, that we have been encouraged to take too much “personal responsibility” for climate change by those very polluters. It is convenient for them to have us blame ourselves, and spend all our energy atoning for our carbon sins through personal measures.
The sense of overwhelm can lead to quite a bit of denial. We may want to react with some anger, saying it’s not my problem. This is just too big for me to cope with. I can’t do anything. It’s up to the scientists/the politicians to deal with this.
Actually the scientists are doing their job, which is to gather the evidence, formulate the theories and publish them. The politicians are not doing their job, which is to take the work of the scientists and translate it into relevant policy. That’s where activism comes in; we need to do our jobs.
We may convince ourselves it can’t be that bad–if it were we would be hearing more about it. It is that bad. We’re starting to hear more about it. Don’t forget that journalists and editors and publishers are also people who struggle with denial. Add to that the reality that most major news-outlets are corporate-owned now, and often directly or indirectly tied to the fossil-fuel industries. It’s that bad, but there are news outlets you can trust for the truth on climate change. I read the Guardian, National Geographic, Nature, the New York Times (the latter is somewhat variable).
What are your options when you’ve realized you need to take action to stop climate change? And what will you do with your fear and your grief as you seek the courage to work on this? Those are issues I’ve faced over and over again, and I can speak to them not with authority, perhaps, but from a good deal of humble experience. My next two posts will be about “climate grief” and “climate courage.”
– Andree Zaleska, Transition Voice
Posted by Gypsy Chief
This week noted homophobe Bryan Fischer warned that Michelle Obama is inviting “demons into the White House.”
The First Lady’s latest offense is hosting a celebration for Diwali, the Hindu “festival of lights,” at the White House. According to Fischer, Hinduism is “a counterfeit religion,” and “in essence, an occult religion.”
“It ultimately represents the doctrine of demons, that is what you have with Hinduism, and now this is being celebrated in the White House,” Fischer raged.
Video of his comments is below; the portion on Mrs. Obama begins around the 2:30 mark:
Fischer went on to reiterate his call for a Christian president to hold an exorcism to “spiritually cleanse” the White House of the Obamas’ demonic spirits in 2016. As Kyle Mantala notes at Right Wing Watch, “We assume that Fischer called for the White House to be similarly cleansed after President George W. Bush left office, since he did the same thing.“
Gypsy Chief’s Comment
Could Buffy help with this?
Posted by Gypsy Chief