Obama’s Climate Initiative: A Green Elitist Assault on Ordinary Citizens

By circumventing Congress and unleashing the vast powers of the administrative regulatory state in the name of combating “climate change,” President Obama has – yet again – revealed his determination to subject the American people to the unchecked whims of the federal bureaucracy.

Obama’s “Climate Action Plan” has nothing to do with the climate. Instead, the climate, in all of its complexity, serves as a convenient pretext for the administration — working hand in glove with environmental groups and non-competitive, rent-seeking industries — to seize regulatory control of the production and use of energy so as to further concentrate power in Washington. Obama’s weapons of choice are executive orders and the regulatory power of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), both of which do not require the approval of elected officials in Congress nor those at the state and local level.

Addressing a crowd gathered at Washington’s elite Georgetown University (where the annual cost of tuition is north of $44,000 a year), Obama outlined his scheme to rid the world of “carbon pollution.” Among other things, it calls for a 17 percent reduction of greenhouse-gas emissions in the U.S. by 2020, more stringent efficiency standards for home appliances, tougher fuel mileage requirements for heavy-duty trucks, and more subsidies for already heavily subsidized and environmentally destructive (massive bird and bat kills) wind farms.

War on Coal

But it is the administration’s plans for power plants that will have the most far-reaching effect on consumers and businesses. In 2012, the Obama EPA issued its “new source performance standard” that effectively made it impossible to build new coal-fired power plants, because no technology exists that would enable utilities to meet the new standards. At the time, the head of EPA’s air office, Gina McCarthy, assured the public that existing plants would not have to meet the new standard and that EPA was not promoting fuel-switching. Less than a year after McCarthy’s solemn promise, however, the following sentence appears on page 19 of Obama’s Climate Action Plan: “Going forward, we will promote fuel-switching from coal to gas for electricity production and encourage the development for a global market for gas.”

The cat was let out of the bag when one of Obama’s science advisors, Daniel Shrag of Harvard, told the New York Times (June 25) that, “Politically, the White House is hesitant to say they are having a war on coal. On the other hand, a war on coal is exactly what is needed.” Coal, of which the United States has by far the largest reserves in the world, still account for 37 percent of the nation’s electricity. The administration’s war on coal amounts to nothing less than industrial sabotage by regulatory means. By eliminating affordable, abundant coal from the nation’s energy mix, the administration is deliberately taking a step that will lead to loss of good-paying jobs in the nation’s leading coal-producing states of Wyoming, West Virginia, Pennsylvania, Kentucky, Illinois, Ohio, Indiana, Texas, Colorado, New Mexico, Alabama, Virginia, Utah, Montana, and North Dakota. No longer able to draw on rich coal reserves, utilities will have little choice but to charge more for the electricity they sell to their customers. Electricity rates will go up, hitting seniors and others living on lower incomes the hardest.

While natural gas extracted from America’s vast shale formations will be able to fill some of the gap, the elimination of coal as a power source will put huge strains on the already weak economy and on household budgets. And what is to keep the war on coal from morphing into a war on gas? While most Americans welcome the jobs and lower power rates the Shale Revolution has made possible, the Obama administration and its allies in the environmental movement remain firm in their hostility to fossil fuels. After coal has been regulated out of existence, green elites will not hesitate to go after natural gas and oil. EPA bureaucrats and Obama administration political appointees are already devising schemes to bring about federal regulation of hydraulic fracturing, better known as fracking.

The Shale Revolution, and all the potential it holds for enabling American energy independence within a few decades, has unfolded without Washington’s heavy hand. To green elites inside and outside the administration, this is precisely the problem. They will not stand idly by and watch fossil fuels, in this case natural gas and shale oil, provide Americans with affordable energy.

Overseeing the implementation of Obama’s Climate Action Plan will be his designated EPA Administrator Gina McCarthy. A fixture in EPA’s bureaucracy for many years, McCarthy is highly skilled at drafting regulations that bypass Congress and impose extraordinary burdens on the lives of ordinary people. How many senators will have the courage and the conviction to stand up for their constituencies in West Virginia, Ohio, North Dakota, Tennessee and elsewhere and vote to reject her nomination?


About the Author: Bonner Cohen, Ph. D.

Bonner Cohen, Ph. D.

Bonner R. Cohen, Ph. D., is a senior policy analyst with CFACT.

  1. cleanwater2

    Draft 7-20-2011

    Experiment that Failed and saved the World trillions.

    the “greenhouse gas effect” does not exist!

    Berthold Klein P.E November 16, 2010 revision 11-19-2010 REVISED
    STARTING JULY 4,2011

    After hearing from a Ph. D in mechanical engineering and a teacher
    of environmental studies that they could not follow this experiment
    it is necessary to rewrite this experiment. It is necessary that
    anyone that can read to be able to understand this experiment and
    what it means. I made a mistake in the first edition as it is
    created as I thought about it and did the experiment. This edition
    is for everyone -the man on the street who would suffer the most by
    government “1984 Big Brother” control and the Ph. D in social
    studies or science.

    have been communicating with some ordinary people and some Ph. D’s
    and I realize that my mission is a “Mission Impossible” being
    able to read does not mean that the reader can comprehend and that
    having a Ph. D means that their ego and arrogance will get in the
    way of comprehension. I will do my best with the help of those that
    edit the new version , so here goes. There are many people that
    have to be told what to believe> Are you one of these?

    this is released it will have been reviewed and edited by knowledge
    individuals most will have minimal science education but do
    understand that the Greenhouse Gas effect does not exist.

    are several words or terms used in this revision that need some

    infrared radiation is a form of radiation(invisible light also know
    as heat rays) that is present in sun light and is also radiated by
    every body of mater whether it is a gas, a liquid or a solid. If
    it is a living thing it will radiate more IR that if it is an
    inanimate object because of its temperature.

    IRag= Certain gases will absorb
    different wavelengths (a characteristic of the light ) depending on
    the construction of the gas. Some gases do not absorb IR , there
    construction will not allow them to absorb the IR, they may absorb
    other forms of radiation but as was said above they still radiate
    IR. Many other materials including water will absorb IR. These
    should not be included in the term IRags.

    has some very important characteristic that are important to earth
    and to live on earth. Because of earth’s fortunate location in the
    universe ,it’s temperature varies from a low of-90 F to a high 130
    F+. But in the majority of the earth temperatures are between 0 F
    to 100 F. and water can change from a gas at all temperature ,to a
    liquid at 32F(0C) or above,and a solid below 32 F.(0 C). Many
    people who pretend to be scientists choose to ignore these facts
    and call Water/l/v/s a “greenhouse gas” As we go through this
    experiment it will become clearer why this is bad science.

    CO2= a gas
    that is breathed out by every living mammal and most other living
    creature,it is absorbed by plants and algae and is them converted
    back to oxygen which we need to live. Most process that produce
    mechanical movements and electrical energy convert fossil fuels to
    CO2( carbon dioxide) A very important and necessary part of live on
    this planets.

    methane a part of “natural gas” used to heat homes ,cook food
    and run engines as cars,buses and trucks,etc .It is present in the
    ground along with oil but is only present in the air(atmosphere) at
    very tiny amounts.( part per billion) While millions of tons of
    this gas escape into the atmosphere most of this is destroyed by
    interaction with Ozone(O3) and UV a very active radiation present
    in sunlight.(this reaction is documented by a paper in the EPA
    library) The Methane that is formed by bacteria is almost
    everywhere. Its from swamps,rice paddies, bottom of oceans, lakes
    and streams, decaying leave piles etc. It is a part of natures
    process of recycling.

    NO2= a gas
    formed by nature when there is lightening. It is also formed in any
    high temperature burning including engines. The gas is washed out
    of the atmosphere in every rainstorm. It is used by plants, and is
    very necessary for their growth.

    demonstrate if the “greenhouse gas effect exists it is necessary
    to define it.

    hypotheses of the “greenhouse gas effect” is the process where a
    combination of IR absorbing gases including

    CO2.CH4. NO2 and others are super insulation and cause the
    atmosphere to be 33 degrees warmer than would be explained by the
    “black body temperature” A term developed by a renowned
    physicist as a theoretical way to compare radiation. There are only
    a few materials and conditions that approach these theoretical
    properties. (The earth and its atmosphere is not one of them.).

    is this done? The hypothesis says that the IRag’s absorb the IR
    radiation then it is “back radiated to earth causing the earth to
    be warmer by the resonating of this heat energy.

    is just the tip of the iceberg of the magic caused by the
    “greenhouse gas effect”

    has been said the truth is in the details therefore anyone that
    wants to get into more of the details,please join in.

    others have not started to define “The greenhouse gas effect”
    lets start with what are the “features that should be testable!”
    Because water/liquid, vapor,solid (H2O /lvs) is different than gases
    IRag’s as CO2 ,Ch4,NO2 and others gases -the IRag’s will be dealt
    with first.


    IRags absorb the IR radiation and thus prevents it from escaping
    into space reducing the rate of atmospheric cool- it causes the air
    to be warmer.

    IRags will “back radiate” IR radiation to earth to cause
    increased heating of the surface.

    IRags will heat up by the absorption of the IR radiation thus
    heating the air.

    IRag’s have different levels of “back-forcing”.Thus CO2 is
    supposed to be from 23 to 70 times more “back radiation “ than
    air and CH4 (methane) is 1000 times that of air. Having ask
    others how this is determined,( no answer yet) ,it is assumed that
    someone has reviewed the amount of IR that a particular molecule
    absorbs by a spectrophotometer analysis then comparing this to the
    absorption of CO2. (I have not seen any experimental data that the
    “back-forcing” relates to absorption).(an assumption based on
    The Bohr model however a time factor is needed) This is a very
    important feature of the “ghg effect”

    higher the concentration of IRags the greater the amount of
    “back-radiation” the higher the “global atmospheric
    temperature will become.(were is the experimental data )

    concentration of CO2 found in million year old Ice cores can be
    used as proof that the “ghg effect” exists. When there is no
    experimental data that proves that the “ghg effect”exists.

    does this lead?

    all know that the “greenhouse”
    effect exist. Anyone that has gotten into a hot car on a sunny
    day.(summer or winter). Has walked into a store with south facing
    window , its temperature will be much higher than a car ,or window
    in the shade. This is caused by confined space heating- this was
    established in 1909 by R.W. Wood a professor of Physics and Optics
    at John Hopkins University from 1901 to 1955.

    experiment could be performed to “prove” that the ”greenhouse
    gas effect exists.

    the AGW point out it is impossible to simulate what actually happens
    in the atmosphere therefore they propose using computer models, the
    problem with “computer models” is that unless all the factors
    that effect the atmosphere are included into the program it is
    “garbage in is garbage out”. When this is tried there are no
    computers made that have sufficient capacity to handle all of the
    factors. Many of the factors are not even fully know yet. Then the
    big guess is what are the factors to include and which are really of
    minor importance and can be left out and still get usable results.
    To data no one has come up with the “right model”

    the list of “critical factor” lets see if there are some way of
    indicating if the concept may exist.

    use the concentration of IRags in the atmosphere for testing does
    not work otherwise there would not be the controversy that exists
    today. In the field of engineering and research there is the use of
    “models”” or model similar factors that can be either up sized
    or down sized that are either similar in behavior or can be
    proportioned to a larger or smaller series of events that relate to
    an actual set of events.

    the amount of heating that is supposed to be added is on the order
    of fractions of a degree per year- we need a more dramatic
    experiment to show that the concept actually exists. If the
    experiment at a much higher concentration does not demonstrate the
    effect then the Concept does not exist. If the concept works at high
    concentration then it can be tried with lower and lower
    concentrations until a threshold of effects is reached.

    numbers are needed now: By definition 10,000 ppm is 1%, therefore
    100 % equals 1million parts per million( 1×10+6) . Another way to
    put it is if there are 1 million soldiers in the army and only one
    has a gun ,he better have a lot of bullets if he is going to defend
    the country. The atmosphere is supposed to contain 400 ppm (round
    Number) therefore a concentration of 100% CO2 is 2500 time that of
    what is in the atmosphere. If the effect exists it should be much
    easier to measure and demonstrate that “back radiation” Is
    causing a heating effect on the earth. .

    it is claimed that CH4 is from 23 to 70 time the effect of CO2,thus
    using the lowers figure by using a concentration of 100 % CH4 ,the
    effect should be 57500 time stronger that using CO2. It is claimed
    that NO2 is 100 time more powerful that CO2 thus it should cause
    250,000 X the effect of CO2 in the atmosphere

    CH4 is found to be about 2ppB ( 2 X 10 -9)in the atmosphere , a
    concentration of 100 % CH4 should give a results that is 5 X 10 + 10
    times what exists in the atmosphere.

    Now if CH4 is 23 times the effect of CO2 another longer chain
    hydrocarbon molecule will be even more powerful thus the proposed
    experiment shown below was done with 100 % butane.

    experiment shown below substituted “natural gas” a mixture of
    70% CH4 about 29% CO2 and the remainder is H2 and other trace gases.
    This is readily available for test purposed from any natural gas
    stove. Now 100 % CO2 is available for several sources, but one that
    is not too expensive is from any Paint ball supply store, another is
    from a supplier of Dry ice. Do not use Alka Seltzer as you have to
    put this in water to get the CO2 thus you have a mixture of CO2 and
    water and water vapor – you are not testing the effect of CO2
    only. Discussion of H2O/lvs in the atmosphere will follow later.

    natural gas mixture should have a combined effect of less that 100%
    CH4 by a weighted average of 70% CH4+ 29% CO2or 3.500000725X10+9
    times the effect of CO2 in the atmosphere. If this occurs the
    temperature increase must be measurable.

    does the experiment contain the high concentration of the IRags for
    this test? Having reviewed several experiments that contained the
    IRags is glass containers then they measures the increase in
    temperature of the gas which had increased, they claimed this
    increase was do to the “ghg”effect, they are absolutely wrong.
    The cause of the temperature increase was do to the heating of the
    glass by its absorbing the IR and the glass heating. ( A Master’s
    thesis (peer reviewed) with this information is available on
    request). Another failure of these tests were their including a
    black cardboard inside the containers, thus additional heating of
    the IRag’s from conduction of heat from the black cardboard. (They
    created a Greenhouse effect-confined space heating)

    proper way to contain the high concentration of IRags is in a thin
    walled material that will not absorb the IR and heat. The experiment
    used crystal clear Mylar balloons. They are available in various
    sizes, several 20 inch diameter(major diameter) were chosen. If you
    want you can use larger ones to contain larger numbers of IRag

    lets discuss the experiment.

    the balloons with the various IRags ,and one with dry air as a

    the balloons reach ambient temperature. If you are going to use
    sunlight let it adjust outside in the shade.

    an IR thermometer to check the temperatures of each balloon, use a
    digital thermometer that reads to 0.1 degree to check air
    temperature in the shade. Record data.

    a large black mate board or a large black cloth or sheet and lay it
    on the ground in the sun. Use the IR thermometer to check the
    temperature as it raises in the sun. Record the data. When it
    appears to reach a maximum then go to step 5.

    the balloons over the black background (about 1 foot above) and
    measure the temperature of the balloons initially. Record the

    the temperature of the black background in the “shadow” of each
    of the balloons also measure the temperature of the black
    background outside of the “shadows” of the balloons.

    lets repeat the Critical factors and note the result of my test to
    the critical factor.


    IRags absorb the IR radiation and thus prevents it from escaping
    into space reducing the rate of atmospheric cool- it causes the air
    to be warmer. The
    air between the balloons and the black background did not change

    IRags will “back radiate” IR radiation to earth to cause
    increased heating of the surface. The
    black background did not change temperature either in the “shadow”
    or outside the shadow. The temperature of the black background
    heated to 20 t0 30 degrees above ambient before the balloons were
    placed over the black background. When this was done outside in
    bright sun light the black background heated to 130 to 140 degrees
    F. Similar temperature can be measured from black asphalt. When the
    experiment was done with the 500 watt power shop light (see
    below)inside the black background went from ambient of 70-72
    degrees to 100 -110 degrees. Again when measuring the temperatures
    of the black background with the IR thermometer there was no
    measurable temperature difference anywhere along the surface.

    IRags will heat up by the absorption of the IR radiation thus
    heating the air. The
    balloons did not warn any warmer than ambient. The IRags in the
    balloons will not warm because that would be a violation of the
    Bohr Model.

    IRag’s have different levels of “back-forcing”. Having ask
    others how this is determined,( no answer yet) ,it is assumed that
    someone has reviewed the amount of IR that a particular molecule
    absorbs by a spectrophotometer analysis then comparing this to the
    absorption of CO2. (I have not seen any experimental data that the
    “back-forcing” relates to absorption).(an assumption based on
    The Bohr model however a time factor is needed) As
    there was no temperature difference under any of the balloons,
    there was no stronger “back-forcing” because the IRag absorbed
    more IR radiation.

    higher the concentration of IRags the greater the amount of
    “back-radiation” the higher the “global atmospheric
    temperature will become.(were
    is the experimental data )

    concentration of CO2 found in million year old Ice cores can be
    used as proof that the “ghg effect” exists. When
    there is no experimental data that proves that the “ghg

    of the IR thermometer: model: MTPRO laser-Micro Temp; temperature
    range: -41degree C/F to 1040 degrees F. IR range 5 to 16 nm. Angle
    of view D:S =11:1

    about $60.00. many other models available.

    have thought about several refinements, but it would not
    change the bottom line that the “ghg effect” is a fairy-tale.

    sure that the AGW’s will not believe this proves that the
    “greenhouse gas effect does not exists , therefore I challenge
    them to come up with an experiment that they claim “proves the
    existence of the “greenhouse gas effect”.

    an alternate light source the experiment has been performed with an
    incandescent light. By using a 500 watt shop power light which
    because of the temperature of the filament approach the spectral
    characteristics of the Sun light ( should have more long wave IR
    because of a lower temperature) It was place one(1) meter away from
    the balloons to avoid conduction and convection heating of the
    balloons. As is stated above there was no difference in the final

    lets talk about water( H2O/lvs):

    H2O/lvs has a major effect on weather conditions, where I’m at in
    Northern Ohio it just started to rain, if it gets any colder we will
    have snow or sleet. Of course tomorrow it may be sunny and clear. As
    is said in the Great Lakes region if you don’t like the weather wait
    15 minutes and it will change. Now the “climate” has not changed
    for the last 300 years just ask the Indians.

    way lets look a H2O/lvs in the atmosphere : If its clear the
    humidity can be from near 0 % relative humidity to 100%. Now if it
    ‘s cloudy the “relative Humidity” can vary from 30 to 100%
    depending on temperatures, Now we know that the air temperature
    where the clouds are forming is at or below the “dew point”, now
    as the H2O vapor cools to form clouds there is a release of energy(
    Heat of condensation), if the general air temperature is low enough
    ( below freezing) more energy is released as ice or snow is formed.
    This energy has to be dissipated either as IR radiation or as
    lightening or probably high winds or tornado.

    is only one phase of the complex weather conditions when H2O/lvs is
    being evaluated another is the solar heating of clouds both day and
    night. During the day the warming of the top of clouds is obvious
    but it is also relevant that in spite of significant solar
    absorption the “clouds “ have not absorbed enough radiation to
    convert the water or solids back to vapor; there is probably a rapid
    turbulent exchange of energy in both directions from evaporation/
    sublimation to condensing, to freezing. This is why “climatologists”
    can not get the correct “sign” on the “forcing” it is a
    constantly changing set of conditions, non are wrong and non are

    lets add the next variable- solar heating at night of the clouds.
    Having taken IR radiation measurements at night for the last year at
    many different times by solar time it is apparent that when the sun
    goes down below the visible horizon , the clouds are still receiving
    solar energy. This has been confirmed by both measurements and
    visible lighting (multiple colors ) of the clouds. The clouds and
    the atmosphere cool until about 2:00 am when there is measurable
    increases in cloud temperatures and air temperatures. This warming
    continues until daylight is visible. The degree of warming is
    related to the time of year and what is happening with the jet
    stream and arctic storms.

    are other factors that are being monitored by real astrophysics
    researcher that are showing that Solar flares, and different type of
    radiation have an effect on cloud formation,this is only a beginning
    of learning about our atmosphere.

    is no way in the world of Fairy-tales that CO2 can have an effect on
    weather or “climate”

    nice thing about this experiment is that it can be done by high
    school physics classes or freshmen college physics lab classes . It
    would teach a very important lesson in that “not all experiments
    have to have a “positive” end result to be meaningful.

    global warming is a hoax,because the “greenhouse gas effect” is
    a fairy -tale.

    Klein P.E.

    19, 2010

    of references:

    paper “Falsification of the Atmospheric CO2 greenhouse effect
    within the frame of physics” by Gerhard Gerlich and Ralf D.
    Tscheuschner is an in-depth examination of the subject. Version 4

    version of an article published as International
    Journal of Modern Physics

    Vol. 23, No. 3 (2009) 275{364 ,
    DOI No: 10.1142/S021797920904984X, c World

    Publishing Company, http://www.worldscinet.com/ijmpb.

    of Alan Carlin of US-EPA March, 2009 that shows that CO2 does not
    cause global warming.

    Gas Hypothesis Violates Fundamentals
    of Physics” by
    Dipl-Ing Heinz Thieme This work has about 10 or 12 link

    support the truth that the greenhouse gas effect is a hoax.


    the London, Edinborough and Dublin Philosophical Magazine , 1909,
    vol 17, p319-320. Cambridge UL shelf mark p340.1.c.95, i

    Hidden Flaw in Greenhouse Theory


    at March 01, 2010 – 09:10:34 AM CST

    below information was a foot note in the IPCC 4 edition. It is
    obvious that there was no evidence to prove that the ghg effect

    the 1860s, physicist John Tyndall recognized the Earth’s natural
    greenhouse effect and suggested
    slight changes in the atmospheric composition could
    about climatic variations. In 1896, a seminal paper by Swedish
    scientist Svante Arrhenius first speculated
    changes in the levels of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere could
    substantially alter the surface temperature through the greenhouse

    1909 when R.W.Wood proved that the understanding of the greenhouse
    effect was in error and the ghg effect does not exist. After Niels
    Bohr published his work and receive a Nobel Prize in Physics in
    1922. The fantasy of the greenhouse gas effect should have died in
    1909 and 1922. Since then it has been shown by several physicists
    that the concept is a Violation of the Second Law of Thermodynamics.

    the politicians don’t give a dam that they are lying. It fits in
    with what they do every hour of every day .Especially the current
    pretend president.

    Albert Einstein after the Publishing of “The Theory of Relativity”
    –one fact out does 1 million “scientist, 10 billion politicians
    and 20 billion environmental whachos-that don’t know what” The
    Second Law of thermodynamics” is.

    of Pennsylvania Law School



    Joint Research Center of the Law School, the Wharton School,

    the Department of Economics in the School of Arts and Sciences

    the University of Pennsylvania


    Warming Advocacy Science: a Cross Examination

    Scott Johnston



    paper can be downloaded without charge from the

    Science Research Network Electronic Paper Collection:


    Astrophysicist Nir Shaviv: ‘There
    is no direct evidence showing that CO2 caused 20th century warming,
    or as a matter of fact, any warming’
    link to this paper on climate depot.

    the Sky Dragon – Death of the Greenhouse Gas Theory [Kindle

    Ball (Author), Claes
    Johnson (Author), Martin
    Hertzberg (Author), Joseph
    A. Olson (Author), Alan
    Siddons (Author), Charles
    Anderson (Author), Hans
    Schreuder (Author), John
    O’Sullivan (Author)

    site references:

    the Maunder





    Great Climate Clash -archives December, 2010 , G3 The greenhouse
    gas effect does not exist.( not yet peer reviewed).

    others are available.

    bottom line is that the facts show that the greenhouse gas effect
    is a fairy-tale and that Man-made global warming is the World
    larges Scam!!!The IPCC and Al Gore should be charged under the US
    Anti-racketeering act and when convicted – they should spend the
    rest of their lives in jail for the Crimes they have committed
    against Humanity.

    only thing more dangerous than ignorance is arrogance.”

    is two wolves and a lamb deciding what to have for dinner. Liberty
    is a well-armed lamb.” Benjamin Franklin


    • J.P. Katigbak

      Yes it is – I like the quote from Benjamin Franklin that democracy “is two wolves and a lamb deciding what to have for dinner. Liberty is a well-armed lamb.”

      But what the true principles of having a limited constitutional monarchy?

      I hope meaningful organisations will understand the true priciples better. – J.P.K.

      P.S.: the ideological and philosophical doctrine of environmentalism is still a bane to both humans and the environment, so keep looking more closely at RIGHT NOW. Thanks again very much.

  2. William556

    Some recent articles are saying that wind turbine farms around the country are being abandoned. Of course they didn’t produce anything like the power they were supposed to but that wasn’t really the point. The point was to get billions of federal dollars flying around so the connected could more easily siphon off a larger share. Funny how rarely the government ever bothers to try to crack down on such theft going back to the post Civil War railroad boom or even scams during the Revolution itself.

0 Pings & Trackbacks