It's about Climate Change Kings, Queens and Pawns Thing

Dear America,

it's getting pretty ridiculous

Carol Roth: Stop scaring our kids – the world is NOT about to end and we are NOT all about to die

all my life,

there has been one provocative statement after another.

See HERE for some fine examples, all well documented and linked...

50 years of failed doomsday, eco-pocalyptic predictions; the so-called ‘experts’ are 0-50

but noooo, this time it's all for real.

right.

We know what is really going on here, don't we. It's a statement, not a question. 

 It's about globalism, a global economy, a smack down against national sovereignty of every nation.

Cue the president of the UNITED STATES, the UN-king of the bunch convening at the UN this week: 

 'The future does not belong to globalists': Trump pushes nationalism in U.N. speech

Trump told world leaders that globalism had “exerted a religious pull over past leaders causing them to ignore their own national interests.”

indeed.  indeed.

Back to the political climate on climate change, from Carol Roth --- "Now, the adults who are supposed to be shielding kids from unlikely doomsday scenarios are forcing those beliefs upon them and using the kids as political pawns."

exactly. 

cue Greta.

not even her own parents are shielding her from this circus....matter of fact, they wrote a family memoir, being packaged and marketed just after Greta's 3am nightmares began (October 2018) -- and yet, the truth is, her mother wrote the memoir before Greta became so afflicted by this thing called climate change.  hmmmmmmm  isn't that interesting.

So is Greta a potential victim of climate change --- or ?  Thank you, Matt Walsh at Daily Wire.

And yet, here we are, experiencing en masse, a global meltdown, with children like Greta who will never forgive world leaders for their reckless, irresponsible, shameful response to climate change worldwide...because children like Greta have been led to believe they have less than 12 years to live now.  Right, AOC?   

She's the little miss from Queens who famously declared:  “Millennials and people, you know, Gen Z and all these folks that will come after us, are looking up, and we’re like: ‘The world is gonna end in 12 years if we don’t address climate change, and your biggest issue is how are we gonna pay for it?”

it's getting pretty ridiculous.

it's making my head spin.  

and yet, it's real.  this is really happening.  Our kids, the pawns, are falling victim to the most vicious kind of fraud.

there are not words.

Make it a Good Day, G  

It's in the Defense of Pure Liberty Thing

Dear America,

yesteryear...

"I disapprove of what you say, 

but I will defend to the death

 your right to say it." 

today...

"I disapprove of what you say, 

thereby you have no right to say it,

 and I will shut you down."

The Left's dictate speaks for itself.

For starters, you should read February's Imprimis, 'Shall We Defend Our Common History?' -- an adaptation of a presentation for Hillsdale College, by Roger Kimball; it's my muse on the day.

The thing is, we are presently erasing history -- in art, statues, books -- through censorship.

Why?  Because some of it, if not most of it, is offensive to some of us, if not all of us.  Some of it hurts to see it; some of it makes us emotional; some of it makes us question our humanity -- or at the very least, the humans who came before us.

To his credit, Trump has thrown out the question, where does it stop?  

Indeed, where does it stop?

But it doesn't stop there, does it?  What about the blatant censorship of the present?

Case in point, Apple deciding to block an app -- that was just approved only a couple of weeks ago --  simply because it doesn't align with its science?

Taking a signal from The Daily Signal's post, 

Geologist Accuses Apple of Political Bias in Removing App Countering Climate Alarmism

There seems to be so many inconvenient facts about the truth surrounding global warming, and someone, a Gregory Whitestone, thought it to be prudent, and perhaps his civic duty, to alarm the public....as in, not so fast Al Gore, et. al... 

and this is interesting, going to the link of Whitestone's book: Inconvenient Facts: The science that Al Gore doesn't want you to know, you come to find out, it's currently out of stock.  right.  Did Amazon just block the book, too?

as the Signal duly notes, wonder if the app was blocked had anything to do with Al Gore being a member of the board, Apple's board?

Guts vs. Gore -- understandably, this girl's on the side of guts.

[And don't be shy, you, too, can join in on the discussion, here.]

Returning to the good read from Roger Kimball in Imprimis, he says, "the more expensive education becomes the more it seems to lead, not to broader understanding, but to narrower horizons."

And isn't that the truth?   

[And on a side-note, 

this is shocking; 

granted, we have only seen 

the tip of the iceberg 

as far as the ramifications 

are concerned on this fraud. 

It's gonna get ugly,  

just sayin']

We are being so politically correct these days, that in an arena once all about questioning bloody everything, partaking in fierce debate,  and open, mindful, critical study, has grown to be nothing more than liberal petri dishes, producing droves of rather hostile, ignorant, political activists hellbent on destroying any and all opposition, like a bad plague.  Shameful.  And pretty sure this nonsense is the cause of a whole lot of global warming. tee hee

but seriously, since when did censorship become cool?

“How do you tell a Communist? 

Well, it’s someone who reads Marx and Lenin. 

And how do you tell an anti-Communist? 

It’s someone who understands

 Marx and Lenin.”  

Ronald Reagan

As Kimball says, "welcome to the new Orwellian world where censorship is free speech and we respect the past by attempting to elide it."

exactly.

The thing is, we should all know by now, that as controls creep in, as opposing opinion is vilified and even restricted, as government expands,  -- liberty contracts; eventually, liberty ceases to exist and the lights never come on again.  (See Venezuela) 

It's just more evidence of how the Law of Cause and Effect, in governance, works (or doesn't work); it happens whether or not you agree with it or not.  It's kinda, like, totally natural, if you think about it, similar to climate change.

Even some on the left can grasp the gravity of our decisions --

from The Washington Examiner: 

The "Green New Deal" is “not achievable or realistic," read a letter from AFL-CIO energy committee heads Cecil Roberts, president of the United Mine Workers of America, and Lonnie Stephenson, president of the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers. 

"We will not accept proposals that could cause immediate harm to millions of our members and their families," the union bosses wrote.

indeed; thank God someone on their side is keeping their wits about them.

Unlike these stupid girls.

Civilization ends due to global warming vs. civilization ends due to the extinction of procreation.

hilarious.  And if you read that post, linked to stupid, you will find findings from a study that says,

"even imposing one-child policies worldwide and 'catastrophic mortality events' would not significantly reduce the global population by 2100. It proposes instead that 'more immediate results for sustainability would emerge from policies and technologies that reverse rising consumption of natural resources'. 

'Even with drastic, draconian, eugenic policies of population reduction – which are completely immoral,' says Pepino, 'we wouldn’t save ourselves. We have to change the way we live'."

and we're baaaaack.

Cue Whitestone: 

—Inconvenient Fact No. 12: “Modern warming began long before SUVs or coal-fired plants.”

— Inconvenient Fact No. 21: “The current warming trend is neither unusual nor unprecedented.”

It's not about the facts.

It never is.

Just look at the Mueller investigation.

“Government does not solve problems. It subsidizes them.” 

― Ronald Reagan

There is a political agenda, with fresh rhetoric applied liberally, literally, day in and day out, and it spans decades.

Here's a clip of one more good read for today:  It comes from The Patriot Post, Jordan Candler:  Debunking Decades of Climate Alarmism:

In June 1989, the Associated Press stated, “A senior U.N. environmental official says entire nations could be wiped off the face of the Earth by rising sea levels if the global warming trend is not reversed by the year 2000. … He said governments have a 10-year window of opportunity to solve the greenhouse effect before it goes beyond human control.” Today, it’s Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez’s turn to wave the dozen-years-left-to-live placard.

In similar fashion, Al Gore in 2009 prophesied, “Some of the models suggest … that there is a 75% chance that the entire polar ice cap during some of summer months could be completely ice free within five to seven years.” As Stepman notes, “In 2014, the ice caps were still there. In fact, it’s 2019 and the ice caps are still there.”

Encore:  Gore vs Guts:

—Inconvenient Fact No. 53: “There are more polar bears now than we’ve had for 50 years.”

and moreover, ice caps are not static!  They move, grow, alter shape and size; it's almost like they evolve.  And that's not rocket science, it's just called common sense.  According to google and people who appreciate history, did you know that the earth was once covered in water!?  Say it isn't so.

We used to teach common sense; we used to teach history, science, literature,  from all points of view.

It's called discussion; nobody gets shushed and everybody gets a chance to speak.  What a concept.  More important, what is Apple so afraid of, for example, when shutting down a silly little app?

I am in favor of everyone having a voice and I will defend, to the death, your right to say it

These days, this great and wondrous liberty is becoming more and more a freedom and luxury of the select Left, while at the same time, imprisoning any, and all, opposition; and everybody should be raising an eyeball questioning the logic back behind the flawed, pseudo-intellectual, elitist, cultural scientific experiment afoot. 

onemorereaganquote!

“They tell us we must learn to live with less, and teach our children that their lives will be less full and prosperous than ours have been; that the America of the coming years will be a place where — because of our past excesses — it will be impossible to dream and make those dreams come true. I don't believe that. And, I don't believe you do either. That is why I am seeking the presidency. I cannot and will not stand by and see this great country destroy itself. Our leaders attempt to blame their failures on circumstances beyond their control, on false estimates by unknown, unidentifiable experts who rewrite modern history in an attempt to convince us our high standard of living, the result of thrift and hard work, is somehow selfish extravagance which we must renounce as we join in sharing scarcity. I don't agree that our nation must resign itself to inevitable decline, yielding its proud position to other hands. I am totally unwilling to see this country fail in its obligation to itself and to the other free peoples of the world.” 

― Ronald Reagan

amen to that, amen to that.

Make it a Good Day, G

It's Fall Lines, Defined Lines, Border Lines and Punch Lines Thing

Dear America,

do what I say, not as I do

and how.
these leftists and their antics...

wasn't it just a couple years ago, when the Left screamed bloody murder responding to The Donald, when he would not commit to accepting the election results during a debate?  They were, like, oh my gosh...that's just horrifying.  Quoting The Hil-liar-y now: “Let’s be clear about what he is saying and what that means. He is denigrating — he is talking down our democracy. 

that was then, when Hillary saw herself coasting into the Oval Office without so much as a hiccup.  At the time, she felt most certain, that it would be she, not he, who ended up on the right side of the electoral vote tally, in the end --  just like everybody else on the Left who fell in line singing the second verse, same as the first.... I'm with HER!  I'm with HER!

Oh the shock and horror of the results.  Oh the shock and horror of the level of delusion within the ranks; everybody got it wrong; and when I say everybody, this girl is mostly referring to the mainstream media, the pollsters, and how the reality of just so many interpretations of the pulse of the people were so spot OFF.

You know, nearly half of the American people feel one way, veering left (ideologically speaking) --  while miracles upon miracles, making nearly, the entire other half, feeling drawn towards another (ideologically speaking).

So to be clear, at the risk of repeating myself:   half of the country happens to veer in a totally different direction, ideologically, than the other.  [I know; it's weird.]

Nearly half one way; and the other half, another.

Okay?  Are we on the same page yet?

Nearly half of U.S. goes left, while the other half goes right.

Now -- noting "nearly" in equal portion;  but the truth is, many of U.S. happen to fall more in line with the oooey gooey middle.

Of course -- ever since The Donald got elected president, the Left has not only fought the legitimacy of the election results, complicated matters with starting the Russian conspiracy hoax, but have never treated the administration, especially President Trump, himself, with so much as a hint of respect of the office/position of power around the globe. Not even a crumb.

Never mind that election laws are currently being broken left and right; no, scratch that, I mean, left and left; and see also, falling under the heading of leaving no election fraud behind, this.....here ya go.

It's just feels like nonstop nonsense.

It never ends.

And so whatever -- Jim Acosta at CNN gets a judge to restore his press credentials -- big whoopie.  Good luck, Jim, getting called upon ever again.

Can we get back to actually talking policy, in keeping with good governing?
Can we get back to cementing the Rule of Law in areas like immigration, securing border lines and enforcing red lines, protecting not only this nation's sovereignty, but the check books of the American taxpayer?

and oh Macron....typical french punch and pomp...“Nationalism is a betrayal of patriotism,” Macron said [Armistice Day 2018]. “By saying, ‘Our interests first, who cares about the others,’ we erase what a nation holds dearest, what gives it life, what gives it grace and what is essential: its moral values.”  Yeah like if it weren't for caring for the whole world, wonder how WWI would have turned out without the US of A...yeah,you're welcome, France.  And all the while, America held a pretty strong stance on immigration, beholden to our sovereign borders and all. (this links to just a quick set of fun facts)

But seriously?  Is that really what Trump is saying, when speaking of keeping America's best interests first and foremost?  Does it immediately extinguish any and all concern for the rest of the world, when in the position of the safe keeping of the American people, American interests?  Does it?Does nationalism really negate any sense of compassion for others, or is this just heated rhetoric over an open fire to make cheap pate out of Trump's remarks?  say oui

According to the world of Google --
pa·tri·ot·ism
/ˈpātrēəˌtizəm/
noun
the quality of being patriotic; vigorous support for one's country.
"a highly decorated officer of unquestionable integrity and patriotism
--------------------
na·tion·al·ism
/ˈnaSH(ə)nəˌlizəm/Submit
noun
patriotic feeling, principles, or efforts.
synonyms: patriotism, patriotic sentiment, flag-waving, xenophobia, chauvinism, jingoism
"their extreme nationalism was frightening"
an extreme form of this, especially marked by a feeling of superiority over other countries.
plural noun: nationalisms
advocacy of political independence for a particular country
---------------------
Hmmmmm do you think the definition for nationalism has been tweaked in recent years?

I believe this may be a case of defining outside the lines, what say you?

Since when did the word nationalism begin to take on extremism as a natural transition...calling a string of words "synonyms" in one breath -- from "patriotism to patriotic sentiment to flag-waving to xenophobia?...chauvinism?  jingoism?"  To be fair -- and balanced -- given all of the last free "synonyms" show "extreme patriotism" also listed as a proper synonym, one would have to question the selective edit.  If you are going to extremes, then you should at least be consistent, right, Google?

Why did patriotism get a pass?  IF there happens to be such a thing as "extreme patriotism" -- and there is -- then where's the complete definition?  Where's the derogatory translation as so freely characterized in nationalism, almost with glee?  Like, there isn't even a list of synonyms included, as divined by design by Google. what up

Now reaching for an old, ancient really, dictionary....you know, the kind we find in print, with its binding showing its age, and picking up, ever so slightly, a funky, musty smell when flipping its pages.  This one just so happens to be The Winston Dictionary, College Edition; and one of the few things I cherish -- as in, probably taking it with me in case of fire,  for it belonged to "pop," my grandfather, dating back to when he was attending Johns Hopkins University.

He was here, in these pages;  and now catching myself hypnotized in thought, just why "wherewithal" and "sympathy" and "finale" were among a spattering of words with check marks next to them. oh well...moving on....It reads like so:

Nationalism -- 1. patriotic feeling, efforts, or principles; devotion to the interests or glory of one's own country; 2. advocacy of , or demand for, national independence; 3. a policy that demands the carrying on of all industries by the nation; 4. an idiom, trait, or custom peculiar to any nation.

Patriotic -- adj.  characterized, or influenced, by love of country.   adv. patriotically.  n. patriotism.

Please note in the margins:  according to The Winston Dictionary, with its first printing nearly one hundred years ago..."patriotism" didn't even warrant its own definition, but "nationalism" did. what up

I mean, c'mon, just a few words from nationalism we find nativism -- the practice of favoring native born citizens rather than immigrants.  philos. the doctrine of innate ideas, or that the mind may receive impressions from within itself.

Wouldn't this be more a synonym to xenophobia, chauvinism, and jingoism?
Let's Google it....

na·tiv·ism
/ˈnādəˌvizəm/Submit
noun
1.
the theory or doctrine that concepts, mental capacities, and mental structures are innate rather than acquired or learned.
2.
US
the policy of protecting the interests of native-born or established inhabitants against those of immigrants.
"a deep vein of xenophobia and nativism"

Wow.  There ya go.

And look at that.
Do you see it?

Under 2.
"US"

puleeze people

I guess Australia doesn't have policy protecting the interests of native-born Australians against those of immigrants; I guess Mexico doesn't have policy protecting the interests of native-born Mexicans against those of immigrants

And what say you, France -- what's the latest?

oh, oui --  I see

America isn't alone, and yet because it's Trump leading the home of the brave -- the global-elite and the ragtag team of leftists media, make edits after edits after edits, only to denounce any and all policy coming out of this administration; never mind, that Trump is echoing the ideological differences of nearly half of the entire country, if not half (or quite possibly, the whole) of the entire world.

And it's not just about where we all stand on immigration --

thinking, um, in areas like, um, climate change now.

And no, we don't have time to get into it just now; we've said enough for one day.

So let me leave you reading the most fascinating read from Daily Mail -- Why 536 AD was the worst year to be alive.

The fog...rolled in and never left....

So something other than fossil fueled cars caused climate change?  A natural wonder, like a volcano, is to blame for catastrophic loss of life and the ability to grow food -- without the help of modern man and the industrial age?  Seriously?  Say it isn't so.

what a riot.

face it folks, the entire country disagrees on most everything.
Some might blame it upon the fall lines -- that being, falling directly by party lines; but I would like to think that many of us just think deeply... widely... deliberately... and vigorously.... upon many things day in and day out all on our own and without nefarious influence or outside pressure.

Do unto others 
and you would have them do 
unto you.

Make it a Good Day, G

It's Aiming for Consensus in a NON-consensus World Thing

Dear America,

"Trigger warning:  the event conducted just beyond this sign may contain triggering and/or sensitive material.   Sexual violence, sexual assault, and abuse are some of the topics mentioned within the event.  If you feel triggered, please know there are resources to help you." @Hofstra University, posted at the doors of the auditorium....just before the first Presidential debate...last week

from Bloomberg...quoting Ding Shuang (who worked at IMF 1997-2010) --

"The consensus in policy-making circles was that more trade meant better economic growth, but the benefits weren’t shared equitably, so now we see a round of anti-globalization, anti-free trade...globalization will stall for the moment, until we can find a way to share those benefits."

here's one more just to get things started --

"The scientific consensus is in and the argument is now over.  If you do not believe in climate change, you do not believe in facts, or in science or empirical truths and therefore, in my humble opinion, should not be allowed to hold public office."  actor Leonardo DiCaprio

so first of all -- regarding this "consensus"...this thing called a collective opinion, and such.  Newsflash:  there is none...and that goes for many, many things, Leonardo...and to all in your company of elitists, inside or outside Hollywood.

and regarding this thing called appeasement to all and to all a good night, a one-size, fits all, pacifier of offenses large and small....enough already.  Even the University of Chicago agrees with me.

We had utopia, it was called The Garden of Eden.
And look how well that turned out ...being the fault of our own starry eyed humanity, we proved royally unfit; suddenly, where there was once only good to be found, now there were two.  From then on, good would share the world with evil, and nothing would ever be the same again.

Pleasing everyone in the uber-sensitive environment we've made for ourselves is now next to impossible.

And trying to divvy up the world into equal portions of shared benefits -- as if the scope of wealth and resources, development and ambition, education and population, were all non-starters  -- is futile, if not prelude to committing total fraud against the globe.

All things being equal, we're not all the same.  But one thing's for certain -- this attempt to coddle everyone at the same time is ludicrous.  And it's giving me heart palpitations.

Here's another good one (from the same Bloomberg piece, linked above);

...Louis Kuijs, head of Asia economics at Oxford Economics in Hong Kong and a former IMF official. “If we lose consensus on what kind of a world we want to have, the world will probably be worse off.”

What kind of world?

Really?

Looking at the current run of clashes and conflicts, recognizing the clear and present danger of  a lack of consensus with the best interests for all, of course, in mind -- including, but not limited to -- ISIS in the Middle East (and lone wolves stationed throughout the world), Russian forces on the move, North Korea playing with fire, China testing the free world, free trade and free waters, liberals ridiculing conservative thought every single bloody day -- making every effort through the mainstream media and social media to shut down anything and everything that doesn't sound like leftist consensus....

This girl just has to wonder...hello!  Consensus is in the eyes of the beholder of a pipe bomb, I mean dream.

What kind of world we want to have, he says....seriously, Louis Kuijs? (love the name, by the way)

We can't even get to an easy consensus at the PTA, and you guys think we should be taking this world, wide, web view of making economic equality for all?  Economic opportunity is one thing, but trying to make it all even-steven -- are you nuts?

And you say, "if we lose consensus on what kind of world we want to have" -- as if we have it right now.  Earth to wonder boy Kuijs -- that is one thing I can surely say  we do not have in our possession.  What consensus do you speak of?  ...the one coming from you and the merry band of elitists who want to corrupt and control the world by pressing a button?  Not sure you guys have the right temperament or authority to do so, as things stand now.  Just sayin'.

I know, me likes to  poke fun.

But it's not funny.

You know what I think is beautiful?
That we DO NOT  have consensus on many, many things.

By lacking in consensus, we gain insight, knowledge, greater understanding of how someone else thinks -- whether right or wrong.   It's at the point of reaching "a consensus"  when all of us should stop and wonder, wait a minute...what are the consequences, what are we missing, what has history taught us thus far?  Is this really what we want, where we want to go, what we should do?  IS it?

And then -- in that moment of consensus-itus realize that the thing we should be doing may not actually be what the consensus of some believe at all; maybe political correctness does affect outcome; just maybe history has been here before, and lays the foundation for a better course of action.

And yes -- maybe the consensus on climate change is YES, there is climate change; but the real question is whether we all believe it is man-made....or just part of the masterpiece that is this world -- a kind of climate change carousing  with mother earth since the beginning of time...indeed.

And here's another angle -- and in the news thanks to one Billy BadBoyClinton.  Take Obamacare -- there was only "consensus" from the left; not one republican voted for it.  Not one.  And now look at it..."the craziest thing ever."

And just for the record -- from the beginning, this Obamacare was planned to fail.  Oh yes, go ahead and hate me, call me a racist, whatever -- it was.  It was planned to fail in order to eventually get to the single payer system, and thereby seal the bad deal into another debt for eternity, adding to the long list of government un-funded liabilities (currently hundreds of trillions in the fiery hole that is hell on hybrid wheels).  Obamacare was designed to break America in two; consider it just another dimension of good and evil playing with the fundamentals, resting on the ultimate goal of total transformation.

Now, before I go for today -- someone near and dear to my heart sent me a link to an article by Victor Davis Hanson; and I'm thinking not only that I like how he thinks, but may even go so far as to admit consensus between two parties without prejudice (teehee).

The thing is:  consensus can change with the winds of time and on a dime -- and we are talking all things being equally man-made this time around.  So without further adieu, read this from Hanson: 2016  Mirrors years that sparked world wars...here's his final two cents:

"The problem is that there is no other “someone” (especially not the United Nations or the European Union) with the requisite power and authority except the United States. But for a long time America has done more than its fair share of international policing — and its people are tired of costly dragon-slaying abroad.

The result is that at this late date, the tough medicine of restoring long-term deterrence is as almost as dangerous as the disease of continual short-term appeasement."

All things are not equal on the world stage, if ever they ever could be! (and btw, the pink hilites was all G x)

America is constantly at work, correcting wrongs of our own making, and even the wrongs we had no business being part of, if only to protect what is good -- and it's a value no man can truly quantify. As a nation, America has always been a citizenship sensitive to the needs of others, foreign and domestic, even if the resolution was a long time in the making.

Trigger warnings abound.  Safe places, there are none.  In reality, we must deal with reality and that includes the workings of good and evil competing for world power, or our attention, all the live long day.  Our reaction to such antics is what reveals who we are and how much we care about WHAT KIND OF WORLD WE WANT TO HAVE.  And that kind of world is constantly in flux -- by hoodlums and globalists sometimes looking an awful lot alike.

What I DO KNOW -- regarding things like ISIS -- they will never ever never ever come to a consensus with the western world.  Never,  Did I say Never?  yes.  never.   There is no consensus there.

Man-made climate change dwellers will never see eye to eye with the Mighty God Made All things of and around the Earth believers -- as climate change comes and goes for ever and a millennium. There is no consensus there.

And regarding the globalization equalization conundrum -- clearly, consensus has not been reached.

It's a moving target: how 'bout we aim for consensus, but keep an open mind.  Almost anything can happen tomorrow, and this, too, shall change.


Make it a Good Day, G

It's Is the Pope Catholic?...and other Things

Dear America,

so,

Is the Pope Catholic?

... beginning the year of mercy, for abortion

...beginning to "embrace" the divorced

...beginning to make annulment cheaper, easier

What's left?  

Wonder what would happen if he declared a year of mercy for murder, homicide, the taking of a life of another?

But he doesn't stop there, now does he?

THE POPE'S TEN COMMANDMENTS ON CLIMATE CHANGE

Now please don't misconstrue, the list might as well be written in stone, for most of them make a whole lot of common sense.  Especially that one that says, "We are not God. The earth was here before us and it has been given to us" .....The point being, Be Humble.

exactly.

But,

"We know that technology based on the use of highly polluting fossil fuels  -- especially coal, but also oil and, to a lesser degree, gas -- needs to be progressively replaced without delay," so speaketh the big guy.

Love the use of the word "progressively" there; that really hits a sweet sun spot, no?

Of course, we recently opined on the president's nature walk in Alaska....you know, to prove the Exit Glacier is melting right before our eyes...you know, all because of the evil use of fossil fuels. [Here's another good "Climate Change" read for a quick refresher course on my point of a couple days ago.]

Going back to a post @ CNN, in March, in regards to the planned visit between the Supreme Being One and Supreme Being Two coming up, it was noted:

Obama has often expressed his admiration for the Pope's ability to call attention to issues including income inequality, even while admitting they disagree on certain social issues.

To which I have to mutter to myself, do they?  

C'mon,  They seem to be cut of the same cloth; it's as if Obama is not just a Christian anymore, he's as good as Catholic as anyone else.

However, a Cardinal with mid-western, Wisconsin roots begs to differ with what we might as well call one thing, the Supremes (of no direct relation to the Supreme Court of these fine United States...that is, yet) --   Cardinal Raymond Burke has thrown caution into the winds of the Vatican, saying:

“One must be very attentive regarding the power of the pope...The pope does not have the power to change teaching [or] doctrine.”

Unless, of course you believe in a certain kind of Hope and Change doctrine -- one that reigns supreme, perhaps at a place that is "under God" but above mankind -- and goes forth, progressively, steadfastly, indoctrinating the malleable, with a force of nature so great, who would dare not agree?

Now taking a cue from an email muse over the weekend, if Christians -- currently holding at about 70% of the population in America...which means, amounting roughly to 220 million people -- were to commandeer the vote come 2016, the direction of the country, and thereby quite possibly the rest of the world, could immediately, in my humble opinion, make way for a certain reformation for the new, new ages.   And how magnificent might that be for every little child of God, for rich or for poor!

What's wrong is this clear intent to take us back to the dark ages, with the help of the Pope, no less -- to a time when the oppressed stayed oppressed, a time when one's class, one's place in society, one's ability to create wealth and pursue happiness was thwarted by all things elitist...big government,  big church, economic controls, crony capitalism, outrageous regulations, and so on and so on, creating the very conditions that hinder true liberty and freedom for all.   [And how crazy is it that the Free Exercise of Religion gets ironically thrown out, too!]

Is this really where we want to go?    Seriously?

Remember how much power the early Catholic church had?  Do you? 

Remember how much power the Church of England had, circa Just Before America Made History?  Do you?

Or how about the power of Islam, of Mohammed, and what people are willing to do for him to this day?

Remember the image of a certain man, who, while vying for position of President of the United States, came on stage looking like a god?

He got the nod and nomination from the Democrats and set foot on the stage as if he truly was America's one       last       great       hope.

After the writing was on the wall on behalf of his bride, Bill Clinton was asked to say a few words at the temporary, man-made temple of the up and coming leader:

"I say to you: Barack Obama is ready to lead America and restore America's leadership in the world" and adding, "People have always been more impressed by the power of our example then by the example of our power."

Today, this administration -- this power --  all goes by way of the climate change argument -- it's a power manufactured out of thin air, it's facts and details contrived for public sway and amusement, it's methods contemptuous in the pure redistribution of wealth and power, it's divisiveness thoroughly malicious, and continues relentlessly, mocking the laws of nature and man, fully engaged to create a new world order, And now, perhaps, complete with the Pope's blessing.

If I didn't believe that this is all part of a grand plan, then perhaps a long walk off a short pier might just be the next step.

But I am not afraid; nor weary; nor disillusioned; nor lost.

Make it a Good Day, G

It's About How Much More We Are Willing to Concede Thing

Dear America,

From The Guardian --

Just when you think American politics cannot get weirder, the White House announced that Barack Obama will trek through the Alaskan wilderness with Bear Grylls for an upcoming episode of Running Wild with Bear Grylls...

 But it fits a pattern. Obama uses unorthodox methods and stunts to project his agenda...

Indeed.

And talk about patterns?

Should we discuss the many mini ice ages?   Or a time when the planet Earth was nearly covered in ICE many millions of years ago, running into a pattern three to four times over?  Or perhaps demand that all 7 billion of us go back to school, to perhaps the sixth grade, to discover the essential elements of the earth and plant growth fully dependent upon CO2, deriving a pattern of the natural give and take of oxygen and CO2 that becomes almost like a daily occurrence -- and a pattern of necessity me thinks?  Has anyone watched the pattern of ice coverage over the are of the Great Lakes, given fluctuations in the natural, in winter, a season that comes and goes, kinda like summer?  Or how about we just take a gander at the pattern of the many embarassing predictions of an Al Gore and his bevy of Global Warming Fanatics?  How about the patterns of using fear and hysteria of all things now generally assumed as "man-made" Climate Change to move bergs of mankind, for political expediency and gain -- if not also to topple America off it's high horse, right Obama?

Here's a really good read from Forbes,

The Period Of No Global Warming Will Soon Be Longer Than the Period of Actual Global Warming

[Now, it was written a year and half ago, so bear that in mind.]

But let's return to the smartest president we have ever had and hear directly from the Authority-and -Theory of Everything-in-Chief:

"This is as good a signpost of what we're dealing with on climate change as just about anything," Obama told reporters waiting at the base of the glacier.

Here's another quote that begins to make heads and tails out of it all, falling into the same honor of never letting an agenda disaster or someone's idiotic hide go to waste; it's pulled from the "Embarrassing Predictions" article (from 2014, linked above), citing within the section titled, "Pentagon Climate Forecasts, " a follow up question in the Washington Times goes to Doug Randall for an explanation for such a great disparity in reality over the last decade, and he says:

“When you are looking at worst-case 10 years out, you are not trying to predict precisely what’s going to happen but instead trying to get people to understand what could happen to motivate strategic decision-making and wake people up,” Randall said. “But whether the actual specifics came true, of course not. That never was the main intent.”

Exactly.

And thanks for the honesty, Doug.

"...[T]o motivate strategic decision-making and wake people up,"  he says, "whether the actual specifics came true...that never was the main intent."

The sideshow going on up in America's upper one -- you know, in the context of the settled science of the lower 48 -- by the O-so-High-One, himself -- proves to be nothing more than another scandalous fraud at the foot of Denali.

It's all about the strategy to create the very conditions  on the ground to warrant the policy changes from On High that The Left deems vital, leading America into energy decisions, economic decisions, quality of life decisions, inhospitable to a growing, abundant, free-enterprising, upwardly mobile, capitalist-friendly, market.

So in hopes of ending this day, rather abruptly -- (what can I say, some days are just better than others) -- let's go to Henry David Thoreau, from deep within his essay on Civil Disobedience:

No man with a genius for legislation has appeared in America.  They are rare in the history of the world.  There are orators, politicians, and eloquent men, by the thousand; but the speaker has not yet opened his mouth to speak who is capable of settling the much-vexed questions of the day.  We love eloquence for its own sake, and not for any truth which it may utter, or any heroism it may inspire.  Our legislators have not yet learned the comparative value of free-trade and of freedom, of union, and of rectitude, to a nation.  They have no genius or talent of comparatively humble questions of taxation and finance, commerce and manufacturers and agriculture.  If we were left solely to the wordy with of legislators in Congress for our guidance, uncorrected by the seasonable experience and the effectual complaints of the people, America would not long retain her rank among nations.  For eighteen hundred years, though perchance I have no right to say it, the New Testament has been written; yet where is the legislator who has the wisdom and practical talent enough to avail himself of the light which it sheds on the science of legislation?

The authority of government, even such as I am willing to submit to , -- for I will cheerfully obey those who know and can do better than I, and in many things even those who neither know nor can do so well, --is still an impure one; to be strictly just, it must have the sanction and consent of the governed.  It can have no pure right over my person and property but what I concede to it,  The progress from an absolute to a limited monarchy, from a limited monarchy to a democracy, is a progress toward a true respect for the individual.   Even the Chinese philosopher was wise enough to regard the individual as the basis of the empire,  Is a democracy, such as we know it, the last improvement possible in government?  Is it not possible to take a step further towards recognizing and organizing the rights of man?   There will never be a really free and enlightened State until the State comes to recognize the individual as a higher and independent power, from which all of its own power and authority are derived, and treats him accordingly.

Or  to put it in terms that may strike a  more resounding chord -- is America producing so much CO2  it is now stifling the growth of everything pure, enlightened and magnificent -- more specifically, an intellectual willing to rise up, to offer a wee bit of civil disobedience, when needed -- and chock full of good science to back it up?   Much like the way of the overgrowth within the world's mightiest of rain-forests -- perhaps too much of a good thing leads to a competition of sorts.   A competition of words, resources, ideas, a way of life from this generation and well into the next, and the next.

The thing is --   AMERICA is receding; just how much more are we willing "to concede" these days?

It's a good question.

Make it a Good Day, G