When do you think the Associated Press reported this?

"The Arctic Ocean is warming up, icebergs are growing scarcer, and in some places the seals are finding the water too hot. Reports from fishermen, seal hunters, and explorers all point to a radical change in climate conditions and hitherto unheard-of temperatures in the Arctic zone. Exploration expeditions report that scarcely any ice has been met as far north as 81 degrees 29 minutes. Within a few years it is predicted that due to the ice melt the sea will rise and make most coastal cities uninhabitable."

The Washington Post published this AP report on Nov. 2, 1922.

You may have noticed that the predicted disaster 92 years ago did not happen, nor have other predicted catastrophes from the global-warming crowd.  Yet the warmists' apocalyptic predictions continue unabated.  Why?

The conservative "activist" community here in Washington got itself into a foaming lather last week over the attempt by Senate Democrats to subject their activities to criminal penalties.

Section 220 of the S.1 "lobbying reform" bill required all activists - even bloggers on the internet - who communicate in any way with 500 or more members of "the public" to register and file reports with the government as lobbyists, and face criminal penalties including heavy fines and one year in jail if they fail to do so.

It was a straightforward and outrageous assault on the First Amendment, true blue fascism embedded right in the very first Senate bill in our new Democrat-controlled Congress.  The New York Times had nary a word of complaint, nor did the rest of the major media.

Yet it was simply the latest example of the assault Democrats are making on our 1^st Amendment free speech rights across the board.  For their "lobbying reform" is part of a growing comprehensive effort to silence and criminalize speech liberals don't like.

Since he assumed office nearly six years ago, US President Barack Hussein Obama has been dogged by allegations of managerial incompetence. Obama, his critics allege, had no managerial experience before he was elected. His lack of such experience, they claim, is reflected in what they see as his incompetent handling of the challenges of the presidency.

In everything from dealing with the Congress, to reining in radical ideologues at the IRS, to handling the chaos at the Mexican border, to putting together coordinated strategies for dealing with everything from Ebola to Islamic State (IS), Obama's critics claim that he is out of his league. That he is incompetent.

But if Israel's experience with him is any guide, then his critics are the ones who are out to sea. Because at least in his handling of US relations with the Jewish state, Obama has exhibited a mastery of the tools of the executive branch unmatched by most of his predecessors.

Obama is a master of mendacity, a virtuoso of malciousness.  Consider two recent news stories:

Do you think the Internal Revenue Service and other government agencies should have the right to seize your assets, including your bank accounts, when you have not been convicted of wrongdoing?

The fact is, the IRS and other government agencies do this all the time, and often without even a formal accusation of wrongdoing.

Thus, in criminal cases, the government has to convince a judge and jury beyond a reasonable doubt that a crime has been committed. Under civil asset-forfeiture laws, no such proof is required -- and, as a result, many innocent people have had their property taken by agents of the federal government.

Anyone who is awake knows that the IRS has been politicized -- and thus critics of the administration live in fear that their property will be taken for the mere act of speaking out against the government.  There is only one solution.