7 Year Rash

Today is the 7th Anniversary of this blog. For a long time this year I considered making this one my last because, quite simply, The Stupid Have Inherited the Earth. Intelligence and Common Sense (let alone <gasp> Logic) are Politically Incorrect. Hell, some Leftists have decreed that just saying “politically incorrect” is Politically Incorrect. 😦

So instead I thought I’d revisit one of my favorites from the last 7 years.

This also goes out the #NeverTrump -ers who are so mindlessly obsessed with hating Donald Trump that they are willing Hillary into the White House.

Hate never felt so Right. 🙂

And a special shout out to the Sabotage Republicans (The Establishment ones and their followers) WHO ALSO want Hillary.

The Generations (and possibly permanent) of damage you want to inflict on what’s LEFT of this country is so short-sighted you deserve her.

It will be YOUR fault.

Agree with me or else!

To the future or to the past, to a time when thought is free, when men are different from one another and do not live alone — to a time when truth exists and what is done cannot be undone: From the age of uniformity, from the age of solitude, from the age of Big Brother, from the age of doublethink — greetings! -George Orwell

So with that in mind, cast your mindless adherence to January 21, 2012  and this Blog and see yourselves currently in it also.

THE ZOMBIE HOARD

They are just a zombie hoard.

Remorseless. Merciless. Incapable of shame, morals or ethics.

They want want what they want when they want it and because they want it and will do anything to get it. Relentlessly.

And what they want is YOU. You to be either converted or cow-towed to their every whim. To do whatever they want when they want it.

Evidence John King, the CNN Liberal Moderator of the South Carolina Debate. He opens the debate with a salicious question to Gingrich about his “open marriage” and Gingrich blows him to bits for it and the crowd goes wild.

He did this to prove his “courage” to stand up to the evil “right wingers” and puff out his chest that he was “journalist” and was going to bravely confront the issue. Meanwhile, anything remotely damaging to President Obama is ignored with great speed and spin.🙂

2016: Just Like they do with Hillary. The Debate will be set up to show that Trump is grumpy, unstable and mean. The fact that Hillary is a congenital, sociopathica Liar has no bearing on the debates whatsover.

Their will be more Candy Crowley moments than ever.

And the Zombie hoard will eat it up like candy. “Brains…”

“In times of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act”.- George Orwell.

And their has never been more deceit now than ever in American History and more mindless Zombie Hoards out to make sure “What difference does it make, anyways?”

Rush Limbaugh (who I rarely get a chance to listen to because of my work schedule): Now, let me tell you one thing here, folks: You cannot shame the mainstream media. If any of you are thinking that the media learned a lesson — if any of you believe that the media finally had it handed to ’em, if you believe that the media had their eyes opened and they are fully awake now and they understand what they’re dealing with — forget it. John King is proud of what happened last night. John King is a hero in the Main Street media because he didn’t back down, because he continued to illustrate how it is that the media does really control the agenda. That was a demonstration of the power they hold over every public figure’s head, that they choose to hold like a guillotine. John King… There may even be some jealousy and envy within the journalist ranks (well, not journalists; within the Democrat Party ranks) because John King is a guy that got in Newt’s face, stared him down — and the fact that Newt told him off? It’s a badge of honor. If you are thinking that John King was embarrassed and ran away with his tail tucked between his legs and learned his lesson and it’ll never happen again? Ah, ah, ah, ah. You cannot shame the mainstream media. They are proud of this. They delight in their power to destroy candidates that they don’t like.

And they don’t like anyone who doesn’t cow-tow to them.

2016: They made THEIR Choice. Now it’s you’re Zombie duty to vote for it or else.

“At the end of the day the message to every conservative who hasn’t run for office is: “You want a piece of this? You want some of this? You want Brian Ross hounding you and your ex-wife and then you want me asking you about it on national TV the next night? Come on in. We’re ready.” That’s the message from John King and CNN last night, and do not doubt me on this.”

2016: look at the evidence, every time new “evidence” comes out about Hillary they bury it. Every time Trump even raises his voice or say one less than perfect political phrase they are on it like flies on shit and they stick to it like super glue and blow it up.

mountain

So the alternative is to cow-tow. To live in fear of the Liberal wrath.

2016: To acquiesce. Given in, the Ministry of Truth has the system rigged.

Hell, the Democrats got caught rigging the Primary, blatantly.

No one really cared.

The Zombie Hoard just went, “oh” and moved on. The Media covered it up.

Debbie Wasserman-Schultz was sacrificed.

End of Story.

#2: Hillary is caught re-handed on the Email Scandal. The FBI even says so. But since Comey has connections to Clinton and doesn’t want to have a mysterious “accident” she is not prosecuted.

Future Hillary Supreme Court Nominee Loretta Lynch, Attorney General and Clinton Cronie refuses to prosecute her.

Other people not connected to Clinton aren’t so lucky.

David_Petraeus

And the reaction from the Zombie Hoard, “Yawn”.

Hillary is still leading in the Polls!

“Brains…”

The Food Police. The TSA. The EPA. The Justice Department. Homeland Security. The FCC.

Because if they can’t make you a zombie, they can at least make you a peasant in fear of your Masters who will not challenge them or not have the power to challenge them.

“[…]you don’t have to be Sun freakin Tzu to know that real fighting isn’t about killing or even hurting the other guy, it’s about scaring him enough to call it a day.”
― Max Brooks, World War Z: An Oral History Of The Zombie War

They’ll just turn your children into zombies instead. 12 years of Grade School and 4 years of College is a lot of Zombie Voodoo time after all. And “getting them while they are young” is entirely within the Zombie Liberal playbook. Make them a zombie before they even know what one is and then make them as immune as possible to any anti-virus and get them addicted to their own Kool-Aid. Feed it to them constantly through the Media and the Internet.

2016: They’ll DEMAND Segregation, “Safe Spaces”, “Diversity” and “Inclusion” mindlessly and will trample Free Speech because they don’t want to be “offended”.

FREEDOM IS SLAVERY

WAR (Class, Gender, Race, Religion) IS PEACE

IGNORANCE IS STRENGTH

Hell, even white people getting a tan will set the little zombie off…

What it does is illustrate that they can be dealt with. But you can’t beat ’em. They’re not gonna be shamed. They’re not going to be shamed into stopping the coverage of conservatives as they do it. It’s going to continue. No matter what kind of shame you think they suffer in a contest like that — no matter how much money they lose, no matter how many of them get fired, no matter how many magazines or TV stations or newspapers get shut down — they are not gonna change. They are hard-core, leftists”

And as I have said over and over again, they are have no morals or ethics because they are governed not by logic and reason but by emotions, mostly the most basic of primitive emotions, Fear, Lust (for power), anger, jealousy, ENVY, etc. –Raw emotions.

2016: THE END JUSTIFIES THE MEANS!

Which is why when you engage them they sound and act like an immature 5 year old. And as we all know from childhood development the child has to develop a sense of shame by have having boundaries and limitations and consequences. And if they don’t, they will grow up with little to no sense of shame.

disagree

2016: “Microaggressions” anyone?

They are usually called sociopaths. I can call them Liberal Zombies.

2016: And the #Never Trumpers and Establishment RINOs.

Liberals have no shame. They want what they want when they want it because they want it.

2016: And the #Never Trumpers and Establishment RINOs.

“…one of the upsides that isn’t gonna happen is the media saying, “Gosh, we’ve been so mean to these people and so unfair. You know, maybe we ought to start being fair.” That’s not going to happen.

Liberals talk about being “fair” which means you’re being unfair to them and should do what they want.

Liberals talk about “compassion” but it’s to make you feel guilty, not them, and to do what they want.

Liberals will talk about “bi-partisanship” but that just means you have to compromise your principles so they can do what they want.

“Diversity” means you’re evil and need to do what they say to repent for your sins.

2016: “Inclusion” Means you include everything THEY say and do it without hesitation.

They are a remorseless hoard. They want what they want when they want it and on their terms only.

Give them everything they want or they’ll cry, scream, bitch, moan, pout and lash out at you.

2016: “White Privilege” anyone?

That is their primitive zombie hoard mentality. And they want YOU.extremists

“Lies are neither bad nor good. Like a fire they can either keep you warm or burn you to death, depending on how they’re used.”
― Max Brooks, World War Z: An Oral History Of The Zombie War

“Most people don’t believe something can happen until it already has. That’s not stupidity or weakness, that’s just human nature.”
― Max Brooks, World War Z: An Oral History Of The Zombie War

“Often, a school is your best bet-perhaps not for education but certainly for protection from an undead attack.”
― Max Brooks, The Zombie Survival Guide

“Remember; no matter how desperate the situation seems, time spent
thinking clearly is never time wasted.”
― Max Brooks, The Zombie Survival Guide

“I think that most people would rather face the light of a real enemy than the darkness of their imagined fears.”
― Max Brooks, World War Z: An Oral History Of The Zombie War

“They feel no fear, why should you?”– Max Brooks

“The zombie may be gone, but the threat lives on.”
― Max Brooks, The Zombie Survival Guide

Get rid of one zombie, and 10 more will take it’s place. So you have to be ready to do battle constantly.

Look at 2010. The Democrats suffered the worst defeat in 80 years. Does it look like they learned ANYTHING?

No.

As a matter of fact the zombie hoard is even tighter, even more determined than ever. They want it EVEN MORE.

So if we defeat then in 2012 will they go away?

HELL NO!

2016: They weren’t defeated. Even more hoards joined them. So if they are beat in 2016 will they finally be defeated and go away.

HELL NO!

They will just keep coming back like a remorseless zombie hoard until you are overwhelmed.

Which is why you will have to fight them all of your days, your kids days and their kids days until the infection is wiped out.

But like any good zombie plaque it only takes 1 to re-ignite it and spread it all over again.

And these zombies have Media and Internet outlets! (and Europe!)

“Looking back, I still can’t believe how unprofessional the news media was. So much spin, so few hard facts. All those digestible sound bites from an army of ‘experts’ all contradicting one another, all trying to seem more ‘shocking’ and ‘in-depth’ than the last one. It was all so confusing, nobody seemed to know what to do.”
― Max Brooks, World War Z: An Oral History Of The Zombie War

“The only rule that ever made sense to me I learned from a history, not an economics, professor at Wharton. “Fear,” he used to say, “fear is the most valuable commodity in the universe.” That blew me away. “Turn on the TV,” he’d say. “What are you seeing? People selling their products? No. People selling the fear of you having to live without their products.” Fuckin’ A, was he right. Fear of aging, fear of loneliness, fear of poverty, fear of failure. Fear is the most basic emotion we have. Fear is primal. Fear sells.
― Max Brooks, World War Z: An Oral History Of The Zombie War

The Democrat Party in a nutshell.

FEAR IS HOPE!

My own personal Fourth Orwellian Precept (which includes WAR IS PEACE, FREEDOM IS SLAVERY, and IGNORANCE IS STRENGTH).

“If you believe you can accomplish everything by “cramming” at the eleventh hour, by all means, don’t lift a finger now. But you may think twice about beginning to build your ark once it has already started raining”
― Max Brooks, The Zombie Survival Guide

“When I believe in my ability to do something, there is no such word as no.”
― Max Brooks, World War Z: An Oral History Of The Zombie War

“. . . show the other side, the one that gets people out of bed the next morning, makes them scratch and scrape and fight for their lives because someone is telling them that they’re going to be okay.”
― Max Brooks, World War Z: An Oral History Of The Zombie War

“This is the only time for high ideals because those ideals are all that we have. We aren’t just fighting for our physical survival, but for the survival of our civilization. We don’t have the luxury of old-world pillars. We don’t have a common heritage, we don’t have a millennia of history. All we have are the dreams and promises that bind us together. All we have…is what we want to be.”
― Max Brooks, World War Z: An Oral History Of The Zombie War

“…We were a shaken, broken species, driven to the edge of extinction and grateful only for tomorrow with perhaps a little less suffering than today. Was this the legacy we would leave our children, a level of anxiety and self-doubt not seen since our simian ancestors cowered in the tallest trees? What kind of world would they rebuild? Would they rebuild at all? Could they continue to progress, knowing that they would be powerless to reclaim their future? And what if that future saw another rise of the living dead? Would our descendants rise to meet them in battle, or simply crumple in meek surrender and accept what they believe to be their inevitable extinction? For this alone, we had to reclaim our planet. We had to prove to ourselves that we could do it, and leave that proof as this war’s greatest monument. The long, hard road back to humanity, or the regressive ennui of Earth’s once-proud primates. That was the choice, and it had to be made now.”
― Max Brooks, World War Z: An Oral History Of The Zombie War

The Future is yours. So is living through “The Walking Dead” and “1984” for real.

truth

Happy Anniversary, Al

 Chicken Little was wrong again. Darn it… 🙂
Actor and activist Larry David was quoted as saying, “You know, Al is a funny guy, but he’s also a very serious guy who believes humans may have only 10 years left to save the planet from turning into a total frying pan.”
 

Watch out world, and we are sorry if you had not realised before reading this, the world is ending today. That’s because today is the day that climate change entrepreneur, and former US Vice President, Al Gore warned us would be the beginning of a global emergency.

And it looks like civilization still is here. A lot worse for wear because of Liberals, but it’s still here. But Iran has nuked us all out of existence or Hillary hasn’t been Coronated yet so Stay Tuned…

Mr Gore told his supporters a decade ago that the world had until 27th January 2016 to end its addiction to fossil fuels or the it would come to an end. Gore did not specify what householders might expect to happen today, but he was clear that this would be the end.

The claim was part of the marketing campaign for his hit documentary “An Inconvenient Truth”, which he maintains was not a cheap attempt to make money off the green frenzy. Although, by sheer coincidence, it did make him a pile of cash.

Shortly before the film’s release Gore warned today would see “a true planetary emergency.” Once again, he offered few details of the problems you might face on your weekly visit to Walmart.

He went on to tell the press: “If you accept the truth of that, then nothing else really matters that much… We have to organize quickly to come up with a coherent and really strong response, and that’s what I’m devoting myself to.”

Townhall would always warn readers in advance of any impending emergency but on this occasion we feel confident you need not stock up on canned beans. Gore has been making the same claim every week for the past ten years… Which has led us to believe his grim predictions might well be unfounded.

We think you should have a drive in your SUV today to celebrate how great life in America really is. Then crack open a cold beer to offend the health lobby too!

Oh, break out the Incandescent Light bulbs, your gun and that tub of Lard you have in the pantry and have a party…

Marc Fitch, author of “Shmexperts: How Ideology and Power Politics Are Disguised As Science,” says even the collapse of these kinds of doomsday predictions won’t do anything to discredit radical environmentalism among the faithful believers of global warming any time soon.

“The unfortunate truth of the matter is that environmentalists will only lose credibility with those who are already skeptical of the global warming movement,” Fitch told WND. “I think time will ultimately make the difference. The global warming movement in general seems to be grasping at any and everything these days to make their case, but the more they try to tie everything (ISIS, immigration, disease, war) to global warming, the more it just falls on deaf ears.”

Average temperature has remained steady for 15 years and some climate scientists suggest the Earth is on the verge of another ice age. Yet Fitch observed environmentalists keep deploying hysterical rhetoric to win over Americans to their cause.

“One of the problems with the environmental movement is that no good news is ever good news,” said Fitch. “The fact that the polar ice caps haven’t melted is seen as a reason to fight harder for their cause rather than give pause for consideration. One would figure that their dire predictions not materializing would be seen as a ray of hope, but instead activists see it as just further reason to preach doom and gloom.”

The bad-news-is-great-for-the-agenda strategy doesn’t seem to be working. A recent poll suggested Americans are relatively unconcerned about climate change, compared to the rest of the developed world.

Part of the problem for radical environmentalists, Fitch suggested, is their grim predictions don’t match up with the facts on the ground.

“There is always an explanation for why their models haven’t been correct or their dire predictions haven’t materialized,” he said. “In fact, there are usually many explanations. We’ve seen coal usage simultaneously cited as the cause of global warming and the reason that the Earth hasn’t warmed enough. With such a massively complex system like the climate, nearly any explanation can be made; it’s like playing connect the dots with the stars in the sky, there are probably millions of different lines of reasoning that can be drawn to make whatever picture you like.”

“They’re having to make excuses for the heat that never happened by claiming the ocean ate it,” he laughed. “Oh, yeah, the ocean ate the heat. It’s way down there at 700 feet below the surface. Well, 700 meters. So that would be almost a half a mile down there. That’s where all the heat is, and it’s gonna come bubbling up there. It’s gonna heat the saltwater, and the heat that the oceans ate is gonna heat up the saltwater, the saltwater is gonna flood and that’s how we’re gonna get the rising sea. This was in all of the pro-global warming, climate change analysis of last week.”

Unfortunately, Fitch said the global warming hysteria will continue for the foreseeable future, regardless of the facts, and skeptics may not live to see themselves vindicated.

“The public may grow even less concerned than they are now and politicians may eventually start to shy away from the global warming panic, but global warming activists do have time on their side,” he said.

“We know that the climate changes because it has done so in the past. We also know that it changes slowly but it does, sooner or later, shift. When that happens – whether we go into another ice age or become like the surface of Venus – some small cadre of activists will still be standing there with a sign saying that it is because of Big Oil.

“It’s like the sidewalk preacher who constantly warns, ‘The end is near.’ He doesn’t have to be right tomorrow, just right eventually. That’s the biggest asset that the activists have; they are warning about things 200 years in the future. Whether they are right or wrong doesn’t matter here and now and so they never have to admit to being wrong, just being a bit early in their predictions.” (townhall and WND)

Political Cartoons by Glenn Foden
Political Cartoons by Gary McCoy
Political Cartoons by Steve Kelley

Attention: Elitists

I know it’s Martin Luther King Day (though I have heard some leftist refer to it as “Civil Right Days” because MLK is not politically correct anymore) but BECAUSE He’s not PC anymore I present you resentment in another form. 🙂

A lot of us complain that our elite betters are ignoring our concerns, but nothing could be further from the truth. They have heard us all right. They have gotten together to come up with a solution to the many problems we have brought to their attention. And that solution is for us to shut up and keep sucking up whatever abuse they choose to heap upon us.

It’s all about empowering the elite to feel smug. And about sticking us normal with the check.

Upset about establishment virtue signaling that requires us to take limitless numbers of Third World denizens into our country? Mad when they take our jobs? Of course, aliens don’t take the elite’s jobs – for example, we lawyers get to bar people who don’t pass the Bar from horning in on our action, but if you’re an American who wants to build houses for a decent wage, well, too bad and so sad!

And if these uninvited guests change your neighborhood so that you can’t read the window signs, well, learn to accept diversity. Of course, these visitors never change what’s inside the elite’s gated communities – except when they change the rich kids’ diapers.

Oh, and if one of them gets hammered and uses his shiny new illegal alien driver’s license to ram his beat up Chevy into a car packed with your son and his friends, that’s a small price to pay for the elite redlining its collective sense of moral self-satisfaction. And if an illegal rapes and murders your daughter, well, better an American woman die than some dreamer’s dream of easy pickings be denied.

 

Your life is not a priority. It’s not even a consideration.

Attention flyover people down there below the elite’s private jets – time (for you) to make some sacrifices for Mother Earth! So what if the actual climate data refuses to cooperate with the climate change theory? So what if the elite predicted an ice age back in the 1970s? The solution to the problem of non-existent global warming is the same as the solution to phantom ice ages – give the elite more money and power.

In fact, there is no “problem” that can’t be solved by use giving the elite more of our money and more of our power.

Sure, some of us don’t live in coastal cities and our need SUVs for our families (we still breed out in here in America, you know), and some of us have jobs where we need gas-guzzling trucks. But the elite’s fetish for eradicating the scourge of the fossil fuels that made modern society possible trumps our petty livelihoods. Another couple bucks a gallon, another couple hundred a month for heat? Shoot, the elites can afford that, and the fact that the normals can’t shouldn’t keep their betters from enjoying the moral ecstasy that comes from imposing deep sacrifices on other people!

Of course, we are always those other people.

When elitists talk about how terrible the cops are, guess who gets mugged or worse when the crime rate goes up? Surprise! It’s never the coastal elitists and moral posers who love hamstringing the cops.

And when they talk about “gun crime,” how come the solutions always seem to involve making it harder for normal people to protect themselves and their families? How come these “common sense gun controls” never seem to target actual criminals? Hmmm, it’s almost like they would rather have us vulnerable and docile instead of able to protect ourselves from thugs…and tyrants.

Is it a secret where the vast majority of gun crime happens and who commits it? Here’s a hint: Democrat big cities and their residents. How about doubling up the cops in the ghettos, arresting the crooks everyone knows are crooks, and supporting the cops when they do it? Just kidding! There are no poser points to score by cracking down on real criminals; the moral superiority money shot comes from pressing that Manolo Blahnik high heel down on us normals and grinding away.

Resentful of Democrat-voting losers and bums who don’t feel like working but who expect you to toil to pay them off? Selfish!

Think that just because one of us would go to prison for, say, mishandling hundreds of classified documents, then a member of the elite should too? Sexist!

Upset that some skeevy weirdo pretending to be a girl is going to crash your daughter’s high school locker room for a bit of live entertainment? Transphobic!

Disagree with a leftist in general, You’re a racist or a Bigot.

So what if their candidates are an old White Socialist and old White Communist, you still hate Minorities. 🙂

Yeah, if you’re a normal American, you’re pretty much the root of all evil. You’re the worst of the worst. You suck.

And if you’re white, you are nothing but evil (unless you’re a Democrat or a RINO then you’re still evil but they want YOUR vote not ours).

Welcome to Political Three Card Monte. Whatever the issue, you lose.

But now we’ve done asking the elite for help. Now we’re telling the establishment how it’s going to be. Put just Trump, Cruz and Carson together and the insurgents own way over 50% of the GOP electorate. They can try to beat us down, but we’re finished thanking them and asking if we may have another. First we’re taking back the Republican Party, then we’re taking back the whole country. And then that feeling you elitists will be feeling won’t be smugness anymore. It’ll be fear. (Kurt Schlichter)

AMEN!

Patience is a Virtue Lost

Derke Hunter: There’s a reason liberals have been so successful in advancing their agenda in the past few decades. It’s not just electoral victories – they’ve played a part, and it’s easier to make things happen if you win elections. But the main factor in their victories is one thing we conservatives are losing sight of: patience. 

ObamaCare took 90 years and they still want more but are patient.

Political Correctness took 2 generations to condition stupid people to be even stupider.

Socialism is good took generations of indoctrination.

Global Warming has been going on for nearly 100 years.

Liberals are very patient for the long game.

In the time of Twitter breaking news, Tinder, microwaves, On Demand, etc., patience is as dead as detectives wearing Fedoras and calling people “Mac.” But it’s key in politics, and conservatives have forgotten that.

Ronald Reagan – the real man, not the myth created with his name – understood the importance of patience. He almost won the GOP nomination in 1976 but lost to President Gerald Ford. 

Although Ford was no conservative, Reagan didn’t turn on him. He supported him. When Ford lost, that opened the door to Reagan’s victory four years later. Had Reagan refused to support Ford, or actively criticized Ford and hurt him in the 1976 election, there’s a chance 1980 would’ve turned out differently. 

Even as president, Reagan understood the importance of patience. His victories in dealing with Congress and the Soviet Union (not much of a difference there, in many respects) didn’t come immediately. Incrementalism was a key weapon – you take what you can get and keep fighting for the rest. What Reagan didn’t do was throw up his hands when he didn’t get all he wanted, leaving small victories on the table because total victory wasn’t, at that moment, obtainable. 

 

Far too many conservatives have forgotten that political victories take time, even if the loss they’re trying to reverse is still fresh. 

Libertarians are famously inpatient. It’s why, outside of a few court victories, they are mostly irrelevant. I take no pleasure in saying this; the country would be much better off if we were significantly more libertarian. But when there’s a political fight to be had, they sit on the sidelines criticizing both sides rather than putting their weight behind the side moving the ball in the direction they want to go.

The purity of libertarians is to be admired, at least in the sense of ideals. The practical implementation of purity as a guide for conducting politics is not. Far too many oppose actions which would move the country in the direction they want because it doesn’t go far enough. They want it all, and they want it now – and anything short of that is a sell-out. 

Many conservatives have adopted this attitude. 

Liberals have been successful because they’ve adopted the opposite stance. For generations, liberals have sought to seize control over health care in the United States. They haven’t yet, but every move they’re made on health care has pushed them closer to that goal. 

Medicare covers the elderly and disabled; Medicaid covers the poor. Liberals have been fighting to lower the age of Medicare eligibility for decades, but they’ve, thankfully, been blocked. They’ve also been fighting to raise the income eligibility for Medicaid for decades, and they’ve been winning. This left a shrinking middle uncovered by government insurance. Obamacare is changing that.

For all the problems with Obamacare, it’s serving its purpose of crowding out private coverage. It was never designed to be the endgame; it’s an increment. It moves the country closer to a government takeover of health care. That was its purpose; that is their plan. And they waited decades for it.

Conservatives, on the other hand, don’t have that kind of patience. With every new electoral victory, they expect some massive shift in the country immediately, if not sooner.

Sadly, much of liberalism is engrained in our laws, our courts and our culture, so it will take time to uncouple it. 

 

Real conservatives are a small percentage of the Republican Party and Republicans in Congress. Yet many conservatives, particularly in media, think each electoral victory immediately should bring about massive conservative change. When that doesn’t happen, they attack with a ferocity they don’t reserve even for liberals. 

No single election is going to turn the tide back toward constitutionally limited government; no one person elected to office will be as pure as the wind-driven snow in their conservatism. It’s going to be a long slog; there are going to be losses. Losing a battle does not constitute losing a war. But quitting does.

There never will be a “silver bullet” election or candidate; that’s impossible. Many times you have to stop getting worse before you start getting better.

In addition to electoral victories, the courts have to change – that will take time. The culture of dependency has to change – that will take time. 

For all their shunning of Christianity, Democrats have the patience of Job when it comes to their agenda. Republicans, on the other hand, are Veruca Salt. They want a Golden Goose and they want it NOW! 

Veruca ended up going down the garbage chute. If conservatives don’t regain some strategic patience, they’ll suffer the same fate. And the country won’t be far behind…

Can’t We all Just Get Along?

“Can’t We all Just get along?” — Rodney King.

NO.  Liberals sure as hell don’t want to. They are to vastly superior for that.

In all my years, living through good times and bad, war, recession, periods of great advancement, social upheaval, the eradication of catastrophic diseases and the myriad of forward leaps and backward slides in this United States of America, I have never seen a time when our population was on such adversarial footing.

The problem is not just disagreement, that always has and always will exist, but it seems that in the past we were always able to find some common ground, with reasonable people on each side of an issue. Through civil discourse, and give and take, negotiations found a path both sides could live with.

I think our forefathers designed our government to make it possible for both sides of an issue to be heard, but look how far that concept has fallen, with congressional leaders not even allowing legislation they disagree with to even get to the floor for debate.

It seems, today, instead of engaging in two-sided conversations and attempts to understand each other, we tend to label and lump all those who disagree with us into categories we consider to be mentally inferior to us, considering anything they say to be out of step, off the wall or just plain stupid.

For instance, if you let it be known that you don’t go along with the global warming theories, you are labeled a mental Neanderthal, unable to understand the catastrophic threat to the planet, and even though, for the last century, the apologists have vacillated between devastating heat and ice age and neither have transpired, you are considered to be a flat earth type doofus.

People from both sides of the liberal-conservative issue will resort to rancid hyperbole and insulting name-calling before they even learn each other’s names, raising tempers to the point that any sensible discussion is all but impossible.

People who consider themselves our intellectual betters, those who spout ideological condescension and know beyond a shadow of a doubt what is good for us, rarely have the foresight to consider what the ramifications of their actions would be, and they consider it an insult to their superior intellect when called on it.

Then there are those who use the word “racist” to describe anyone with the nerve to criticize President Obama or believe that “all lives matter.”

If you consider an unborn fetus to be a person, especially if you are a man, you are quickly told that what a woman does with her body falls under a “woman’s right to choose.” It’s a category that supersedes all others governing natal matters, something that is none of a man’s business.

They have the power of life and death and you don’t, son shut the F*ck up, you don’t matter. 🙂

Poor me, I was unaware that a woman could become in a “family way” without the participation of a male.

The Feminists of today are sure working hard for it. Or at least just making the Male just a necessary evil or cattle.

The Republican presidential debates this year, especially the ones hosted by CNN, at least in my opinion, have been more incendiary than informative. The moderators have plumbed the ignition points and tried to pit candidate against candidate, resulting in petty arguments about who did what, when and to whom, each candidate trying to one up the other in exposing past mistakes and present faults. Meanwhile, the audience is left wondering if either one is worth voting for.

Only Hillary. To The Media SHE IS THE ONLY CANDIDATE. Everyone else is just an annoyance to swat down.

I don’t really know what has lead to this attitude of prejudging someone and labeling their ideas irrelevant and contrary before even a word is said, but I have a sneaking suspicion that the nova explosion of social media could claim a lion’s share of the blame.

Being able to hide behind an avatar and say basically anything you want to without even having to reveal your true identity or whereabouts emboldens even the faint of heart to say things they would never say to someone’s face.

Plus, narcissism that just say they are right and you’re wrong and that’s it. And they are the “victims” of hate even when they are perpetrating the hate.

And you can find plenty of sides to choose and plenty of examples to follow if you’re not the kind of person who thinks for themselves. So many people fall into this trap, faithfully repeating what they have heard, never mind checking the validity. They lead the conversation with slights and insults and never even get past the verbal garbage to meaningful dialogue about whatever the subject was in the first place.

The anything with a (D) crowd. 🙂  “What difference does it make?” 🙂

It has digressed to the point that so many people are able to tell you that you’re an idiot, racist, backward-thinking, bigoted misogynist, but for the life of them, they can’t tell you why they feel that way.

But don’t challenge them, because you’re still an an idiot, racist, backward-thinking, bigoted misogynist regardless. 🙂

Preconditioned ideas, without reason, are a dangerous thing.

What do you think?

I think Liberal think with their emotions and emotions have been proven to override logic and reason.

Greed and Fear. That’s the liberal way.

Pray for our troops and the peace of Jerusalem

God Bless America

Charlie Daniels

 

Fight Global Warming!

 Contrary to recent headlines — and a talk by actor Arnold Schwarzenegger at the United Nations Paris Climate Change Conference — eating a vegetarian diet could contribute to climate change.

Opting for that plate of bacon instead of a salad can actually help save the environment.

They say everything is better with bacon. Now it’s your duty to the planet and your contribution to Global Climate Change!

Not to mention, since it’s Pork, it’s an anti-Muslim Terrorist weapon! 🙂

A newly released study conducted by Carnegie Mellon University researchers found that following the U.S. Department of Agriculture recommendations to eat more fruits, vegetables, dairy, and seafood is more harmful to the environment than eating meat.

According to the study, a vegetarian diet requires more greenhouse gas emissions per calorie than meat.

The study found eating a vegetarian diet consisting of fruits, vegetables, dairy, and seafood “increased the environmental impact in all three categories: Energy use went up by 38 percent, water use by 10 percent and GHG emissions by 6 percent.”

Professor Paul Fischbeck said, “Eating lettuce is over three times worse in greenhouse gas emissions than eating bacon.”

“Lots of common vegetables require more resources per calorie than you would think. Eggplant, celery and cucumbers look particularly bad when compared to pork or chicken.”

Combined with a 2012 study that revealed “the adoption of the vegetarian diet tends to follow the onset of mental disorders” and that “a vegetarian diet is associated with an elevated risk of mental disorders” in Western countries, it doesn’t make sense not to indulge yourself with meat.

On one hand, the results showed that getting our weight under control and eating fewer calories, has a positive effect on the environment and reduces energy use, water use and GHG emissions from the food supply chain by approximately 9 percent.

However, eating the recommended “healthier” foods — a mix of fruits, vegetables, dairy and seafood — increased the environmental impact in all three categories: Energy use went up by 38 percent, water use by 10 percent and GHG emissions by 6 percent.

“There’s a complex relationship between diet and the environment,” Tom said. “What is good for us health-wise isn’t always what’s best for the environment. That’s important for public officials to know and for them to be cognizant of these tradeoffs as they develop or continue to develop dietary guidelines in the future.”

So eat more Meat. Fight Terrorism & Global Warming!

Political Cartoons by Lisa Benson
Political Cartoons by Henry Payne

20 Quotes

20) “The shrill little twerps shrieking ‘You can’t say that!’ are a far bigger problem than the stuff they object to.” — Mark Steyn

19) “The biggest thing leaders don’t do now is listen. They no longer hear the voices of common people. Or they imitate what they think it is and it sounds backward and embarrassing. In this age we will see political leaders, and institutions, rock, shatter and fall due to that deafness.” — Peggy Noonan

18) “President Obama is a wartime president who doesn’t seem to realize it.” — Tom Cotton

17) “Republican leaders believe the goal of the Republican Party is to gain and maintain power; conservatives believe the goal of the Republican Party is to represent conservative interests, no matter what comes. The Republican Party has become an excellent vehicle for the former goal, and a smoking garbage heap when it comes to the latter.” — Ben Shapiro

16) “Many Americans who say that we should learn from other people, especially Europeans, mean that we should imitate what they did. That may make those who talk this way feel superior to other Americans. But let us never forget that the most disastrous ideologies of the 20th century — Communism, Fascism and Nazism — all originated in Europe. So did both World Wars.” — Thomas Sowell

15) “Modern journalism is all about deciding which facts the public shouldn’t know because they might reflect badly on Democrats.” — Jim Treacher

14) “If angry political rhetoric bred violence, America would look something like Syria – awash in genocidal conflict. For sheer viciousness the robust debates between politicians and activists often pale in comparison to the “flame wars” on Twitter and Facebook, where arguments quickly become deeply personal. America’s political culture is thoughtful in parts, but it’s also a shouting culture, and anyone who’s looking for angry or extremist rhetoric can find it. It’s everywhere.” — David French

13) “This is why, for example, I basically disengage from anyone who uses the phrase ‘white privilege’ or the term ‘patriarchy’. There is a possible world in which these might be useful terms of discussion, but if that were ever our universe it has long since ceased to be. Now what they mean is ‘I am about to attempt to bully you into submission using kafkatraps and your own sense of decency as a club.’” — Eric Raymond

12) “The left is always dabbling in fictional dystopias where there is a yawning chasm between rich and poor, where the country is riven by racial conflict, and where the whole nation has to be impoverished to serve the power and vanity of the Capitol—and yet somehow this is the system they always create when they’re in power, in places like Baltimore and Chicago.” — Robert Tracinski

11) “Conservatives say ‘you can be somebody.’ Liberals say ‘you should hate somebody.’ The latter mentality is exactly what we’ve seen play out in Ferguson and Baltimore.” — Carl Jackson

10) “Years ago Marvin Olasky wrote how compassion traditionally meant to ‘suffer with.’ Over the years it turned into writing a check. Now it means making other people write checks.” — Doug Bandow

9) “Am I morally obligated to defend the president every time somebody says something bad or controversial about him? I don’t think so! …If someone made a nasty or controversial statement about me to the president, do you really think he would come to my rescue? No chance!” – Donald Trump

8) “There’s a revealing tendency in most liberal and left-wing histories of the United States of America. When something bad happens, there tend to be only two possible villains: conservatives or America itself (or a combination of the two). During the McCarthy period, evil conservatives whipped up paranoia and fear. But the Red Scare of 1919, overseen by Woodrow Wilson’s progressive attorney general, A. Mitchell Palmer, was a blot on America’s soul. When FDR interned Japanese-Americans, it was an example of America’s sins. When FDR’s party ruthlessly enforced Jim Crow in this country, racism was a stain on America. After the Democrats lost the South, and the South in turn became less racist, the stain was moved to the Republican Party. Liberalism is never to blame.” — Jonah Goldberg

7) “How did all these illegal aliens get into ‘the shadows’ in the first place? They weren’t kidnapped and dragged across the border. They came here. At most — and this is dubious — it’s a crisis for the illegal immigrants. But ‘living in the shadows’ is evidently better than living in Guadalajara, otherwise, there’s an easy solution. Living in the shadows doesn’t seem to be much of a crisis even for them.” — Ann Coulter

6) “The gentlemen who wrote the Constitution did not get around to enfranchising women or abolishing slavery, but they snuck in a constitutional right to gay marriage that we’ve somehow overlooked for 228 years or so: No mentally functional adult, regardless of his views on gay marriage, should be expected to pretend that that is true.” — Kevin Williamson

5) “Taken literally, Islamophobia means ‘fear of Islam.’ OK, well, there are many Muslims who have gone to great lengths to convince us to fear it. So what if I finally oblige them?” — Matt Walsh

4) “The questions asked in this debate illustrate why the American people don’t trust the media. This is not a cage match. And you look at the questions—Donald Trump, are you a comic book villain? Ben Carson, can you do math? John Kasich, will you insult two people over here? Marco Rubio, why don’t you resign? Jeb Bush, why have your numbers fallen? How about talking about the substantive issues? And Carl, I’m not finished yet. The contrast with the Democratic debate, where every thought and question from the media was, which of you is more handsome and why?” – Ted Cruz had the best moment in any debate so far when he slammed the moderators

3) “Deciding who is eligible to complain about microaggressions is itself an act by which the majority imposes its will, and it is felt as alienating by the minorities who are effectively told that they don’t have the same right to ask for decent treatment as other groups.” — Megan McArdle

2) “If gun free zones save lives, why doesn’t Obama just declare Iraq, Syria & Afghanistan one big gun free zone?” — Wayne LaPierre

1) “We are not a nation of immigrants. We are a nation of citizens.” – Mark Levin

Happy White Privilege Everyone! 🙂

Now the irony Quote (From Politico)

Among the “legacies” Obama will be traveling on Air Force One to every corner of the globe to promote will be “progress against the Islamic State and significant global movement on climate change.”

Obama has asked aides to set a busy international travel schedule for him in his final year, with “half a dozen” trips already in the works and more potentially coming together. The travel will be aimed at cementing a foreign policy legacy he hopes will include the Trans-Pacific Partnership, increased attention to Asia, an opening of Latin America, progress against the Islamic State and significant global movement on climate change.

The only continents the White House is ruling out as presidential destinations are Australia and Antarctica

Why does he not hate Australia? 🙂
He’s going to go around the world and tell them how great he is, and they’ll be just as glad he’s come and gone as we will be in January 2017.
HAPPY NEW YEAR!
Political Cartoons by Steve Breen

 

The Best and Worst of 2015

Derek Hunter: As far as years go, 2015 certainly was one of them. The news was not wanting for content, and we columnists were not wanting for material. It was a year of tragedies and triumphs bookended by terrorist attacks in Paris. A reality TV star became the leading candidate of a major political party, “Star Wars” returned, and I got married. Yep, 2015 was quite a year.

I had a health scare that resulted in a pacemaker and a different view on mortality just months after my Dad died.

Not the best of times by far.

Politics:

The Best

Donald Trump. For all his problems, and they are legion, and the bluster, and it is constant, he’s done more than anyone in recent years to get people to pay attention to politics and just how corrupt the media and the Democrats have become. He’s been battering the media since the start, slamming his opponents since and changing how politics is done.

While, I’m still not a full on Trump guy I do like that he makes the Left and the RINOs crazy and just doesn’t give a damn. That really shakes them up.

Trump has been holding a clinic on how to run against Democrats and the media since his announcement. Aside from momentary flashes, none of the rest of the field appears to have learned a thing.

Because they are all stuck in their ways. They can’t see doing it any other way. Especially, Democrats, they have one playbook and they go to it every nanosecond of every day.

Expect all out nuclear war again on the Republicans. No atom will be lest un-nuked, no ethic or moral will not be cr0ssed in the quest for the Coronation of King Barack’s successor Queen Hillary.

The Republican RINOs are just plain lost.

If Trump is the nominee, Democrats may well win, but they will have been so battered and bruised they’d be hard-pressed to govern with any effectiveness. If he isn’t the nominee, whoever is will have learned how to be locked in a box with a rabid spider monkey and survive. The eventual nominee, whoever it ends up being, will be a much more devastating candidate thanks to Trump’s entry into the race.

The Media is still setting up the Coronation of Queen Hillary I like they have for 4 years now. I doubt they are going to change.

But maybe, just maybe, the sleeping stupid will recognize it for what it is.

That,and just maybe, the Republicans will actually run a campaign to WIN this time. Maybe.

 

The Worst

As awful as she is, Hillary Clinton is not the worst person on the national political stage. Until he leaves office, Barack Obama’s head wears the crown.

In a post-9/11, post-Paris, post-San Bernardino world, the president of the United States managed to go 12 months in which he used the words “radical Islamic terrorism” only to chastise others for saying them.

Well, you’re talking about his friends and mentors, the Muslims. They can’t be evil. That’s like Lule finding out Darth Vader is his Father…. 🙂

The economy continues to falter, our enemies are on the march, and the president has improved his short-game. The Obama presidency is a hilarious joke, but sadly it’s not the funny kind of joke.

But the Democrats continue to self-delude themselves that everything is awesome and we just need to get rid of those naybobs negativity.

One more year…

11 Months+ a few days. Don’t make it any longer than it has to be. Though if Queen Hillary wins we’re all doomed and you might as well close up shop and move to Fiji because it’s over.

Lie Of The Year

The “winner” of this category is obvious, which is why it hasn’t won any of these “awards” from the mainstream media: Hillary Clinton’s ever-evolving claims about classified material on her secret, unsecured email server.

Though I think her saying that the Benghazi families who have been ripping her for years about her You Tube cause of the incident are now lying because she never said it was pretty close.

“What Difference Does it Make?”

Her original statement at her press conference at the UN, was, “I did not email any classified material to anyone on my email. There is no classified material.” High-stakes divorce settlements are less carefully worded.

Note how she specifically said she didn’t send any classified material, and how there “is” nothing classified on her server. She’d wiped it by then, though not thoroughly, so, in using present tense, she was telling her version of the truth.

After that original statement, Hillary’s story “evolved” at least two more times to she never “sent or received anything marked classified at the time.”

After that lie the media lost interest. Why wouldn’t they? Their candidate is ensnared in an FBI investigation that, were it anyone else, already would have led to an indictment and hundreds of thousands of dollars in legal fees by now.

But we aren’t named Clinton; we haven’t been selling, or at least renting, our positions for sums of money that rival the worth of third-world economies, and a president of her party still controls the prosecutors.

No, we’re civilians, bound by truth, and she’s Hillary, utterly unburdened by such trivialities.

As we wind up 2015, I think we’ve dwelled enough on politics. So a few notes on a couple of other things.

Sports

The year started with a great Super Bowl. What a game! But it will be remembered as the game that gave us Deflategate. Tom Brady won – everything. He continues to live a charmed life, and good for him. Unless you bet against him.

And the Seahawks created a blunder for the ages that will be talked about until Liberals outlaw football altogether sometime later in the Century.

 

The Super Bowl was the highlight of the year for New England sports fans, but the rest of the world had to suffer until the World Series. After decades of miserable losing, New England (particularly in Boston) started winning. And their fans, both in baseball and football, became even more miserable to be around during a game. And I say that as someone with many friends who fit this description.

But the highlight of the year was the World Series.

The Kansas City Royals are a lot of fun to watch. They scrap and scrape together runs in a way no other team does.

Arizona Cardinals anyone? Anyone?? 🙂

Movies

I love “Star Wars,” saw it three times the weekend it opened. But it doesn’t win for movie of the year with me. There were a lot of great “art house” movies, and I’m sure one with $48 in box office receipts will win the Oscar. But “The Martian” was the most enjoyable movie of 2015. If you haven’t seen it yet, do yourself a favor. Even if you don’t care for Matt Damon (and I wouldn’t blame you), you’ll enjoy this movie.

I love “Star Wars” but I still think either Jurassic World or Avengers 2. I never saw “The Martian”.

Television

“The Walking Dead” remains TV’s best drama.

DOCTOR WHO! 🙂

The zombie aspect might turn your off, but it’s much more than that. Moreover, it’s a show that generates true suspense, in which no one knows what’s going to happen from week to week and no character, no matter who they are, is safe.

DOCTOR WHO! 🙂

If you’re a comic book nerd, or if you don’t mind super hero movies, might I also suggest checking out “Jessica Jones” on Netflix. It’s a surprisingly good series with humor, action and a great anti-hero. And, unlike “The Walking Dead,” you can binge-watch it over a weekend.

Haven’t got around to it yet. And that shows you how technology has changed so much.

I’m not sad to see 2015 go, though it does seem like it went fast. With 2016 being an election year, it will fly by as well. While I work and play in the first half of this column, life happens in the rest. Hope you had a great 2015, and I hope you have as much fun as possible in 2016. 

Here’s to 2016. The Hope of the future of our Country rests on your shoulders.

No pressure. 🙂

Michael Ramirez Cartoon
Star Wars Matters
Political Cartoons by Henry Payne

You Just Might Be A Liberal…

Are you not sure that you’re a liberal? Well, there’s an easy way to find out. You might be a liberal if…

1) ….Your newspaper calls people “bigoted” for being worried about bringing Syrian refugees to America, but you won’t run pictures of Muhammad because you’re afraid Muslims might kill you for it.

2) ….You think every man accused of sexual assault is guilty until proven innocent except Bill Clinton.

3)….You insist that anyone who questions global warming hates science even though you don’t understand any of the science behind it yourself and you say we have to do something about climate change primarily because you want to impress your liberal friends.

4) ….You are terrified that holding terrorists at Guantanamo Bay who are trying to murder Americans might make the other terrorists who are trying to murder Americans mad.

5) ….You believe there’s a “Republican War on Women;” yet you are okay with aborting baby girls for any reason, think any man who says he identifies as a woman should be able to use the women’s bathroom and you want to put Bill Clinton back in the White House.

6) ….You claim to constantly hear Republican “dog whistles” that 99% of the population misses; yet you’d deny you’re racist for insisting that black Americans aren’t competent enough to get an ID to vote.

 

7) …You think there’s a possibility that Obama might be able to have a productive conversation with radical Islamists who want to kill us, but dialogue with the NRA is impossible.

8)….You believe Hillary Clinton is telling the truth. About anything. Ever.

9) ….You simultaneously believe the police are violent trigger-happy racists who shoot people for no good reason and that we should disarm the populace so that only the government has guns.

10) ….You went to a talk given on your campus by a conservative just so you could scream at him for “invading your safe space.”

11) ….You think Chris Kyle was a monster for killing so many enemies of America while Bowe Bergdahl deserves to be treated with respect and compassion after deserting his unit.

12) ….You believe you’re a caring and compassionate person because you advocate giving other people’s money away to people you hope will vote for candidates you like.

13) ….You believe that anyone who dislikes Barack Obama must hate him because he’s a minority, but your hatred of Ted Cruz and Clarence Thomas is perfectly justifiable.

14) ….You think you are a sophisticated person with a deep understanding of complex political issues, but sum up every one with some variation of, “Republicans are evil, racist, and they hate you while liberals like me are nice!”

15) ….You think it’s vitally important to increase the number of Muslim immigrants coming to America so they can inform on all the other Muslims who are planning terrorist attacks.

16) ….You blame the Republicans for the failure of Obamacare even though none of them voted for it.

17) ….Your first response to a terrorist attack committed by radical Islamists who’ve sworn allegiance to ISIS is to try to disarm every law-abiding gun owner in the country.

18) ….You think an unemployed, white factory worker who’s struggling to feed his family has some sort of racial privilege compared to Barack Obama, Melissa Harris Perry or Al Sharpton.

19) ….You say fences don’t work and gun-free zones do, but if Republicans wanted the fence around the White House taken down and demanded that the Secret Service be disarmed, you’d accuse them of trying to get Obama killed.

20) ….You believe Bruce Jenner is a woman, Rachel Dolezal is black and Elizabeth Warren is an Indian.

21)  Food in any way can be a “microagression” based on race, religion, sex, or ethnicity.

22) Freedom is Slavery. Ignorance is Strength. Guns kill people so getting rid of Guns will kill less people.

23) The Power of Life and Death is “Pro-Choice”.

24) Any immigration is good no matter how it was done and anyone opposed to any immigration of any kind is “racist”.

25) A Religion is a Race, unless they are Christians, then they are just bigots.

26) Utter the word “islamophobia” and mean it.

27) Anything with a (D) after their name is ok and can do anything they want because it’s better than they alternative.

28) Democrats Lie, but it’s your fault not theirs.

29) A Tax is a Penalty, even after it’s ruled a Tax it’s still a Penalty.

30) “What Difference Does it Make?”

31) It was the fault of a You Tube Video.

32) That the Media is not biased and that people like Hillary and Barack are “moderates” and any Republican is “extreme”.

Political Cartoons by Gary Varvel
Political Cartoons by Bob Gorrell
Political Cartoons by Steve Kelley
Political Cartoons by Michael Ramirez

Faulty Towers

The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration’s reliance on poorly-sited weather stations to calculate surface temperatures is inflating the warming trend of the U.S. and maybe even the rest of the world, according to a landmark study looking at three decades of data.

“The majority of weather stations used by NOAA to detect climate change temperature signal have been compromised by encroachment of artificial surfaces like concrete, asphalt, and heat sources like air conditioner exhausts,” Anthony Watts, a seasoned meteorologist and lead author of the study, said in a statement Thursday.

These “compromised” weather stations run hotter than stations that are well-sited, and are used by NOAA as a benchmark to make upward adjustments for other weather stations that are part of the agency’s official temperature record.

Watts and his fellow researchers found only 410 “unperturbed” weather stations out of the 1,218 stations used by NOAA to determine U.S. climate trends. These “unperturbed” stations don’t need to be adjusted by NOAA because they had not been moved, had any equipment changes, or change in the time temperatures were observed.

 

Watts found well-sited stations show significantly less warming than poorly-sited stations from 1979 to 2008 — the time period was chosen in order to respond to NOAA papers from 2009 and 2010 justifying its weather station adjustments. Now, Watts has years of evidence showing NOAA is relying on shoddy weather stations to make its temperature adjustments.

“This study demonstrates conclusively that this issue affects temperature trend and that NOAA’s methods are not correcting for this problem, resulting in an inflated temperature trend. It suggests that the trend for U.S. temperature will need to be corrected.” Watts said.

Why would they? They have the data THEY WANT, not the data they got.

The Agenda is The Agenda. The Narrative is The Narrative.

Watts NOAA thermometers

What’s more troubling, is that similar siting problems have been observed at weather stations around the world, meaning the global warming present in the surface temperature record may be overblown. Watts’ study comes after NOAA published a June study making further adjustments to temperature data and purported to eliminate the “hiatus” in global warming.

Watts’ new paper casts more doubt on NOAA’s temperature adjustments — which always seem to increase the warming trend. Correcting for these poorly-sited stations could also bring surface warming trends more in line with observations from satellites, which show no statistically significant warming for about two decades.

“We believe the NOAA/NCDC homogenization adjustment causes well sited stations to be adjusted upwards to match the trends of poorly sited stations,” according to Watts’ study. “The data suggests that the divergence between well and poorly sited stations is gradual, not a result of spurious step change due to poor metadata.”

Watts says the warming trend at well-sited stations was “found to be collectively about 2/3 as large as U.S. trends estimated in the classes with greater expected artificial impact.” NOAA data adjustments greatly reduce those differences but produce trends that are more consistent with the stations with greater expected artificial impact.”

NOAA has come under fire in recent months for “homogenizing” the temperature data, a process used by scientists to correct for biases in the data. Scientists go in and either ratchet up or down temperatures from thermometers up or down based on things like changes in the time of day temperatures are observed, the equipment used to take readings, or changes in the actual locations of thermometers. NOAA has defended its data adjustments are necessary to get more accurate data.

But there’s a bigger question: why is NOAA relying on so many poorly-sited thermometers to collect temperature data?

“It’s one of the factors they did not consider,” Dr. John Christy, a climatologist at the University of Alabama in Huntsville and co-author of the study, told The Daily Caller News Foundation.

“Many of the thermometer sites have been contaminated,” Christy said, adding that poor siting “increases the warming rates.”

Christy and his colleague Dr. Roy Spencer created the first satellite datasets to observe global temperature trends in 1989, and have global data going back to 1979. Christy’s and Spencer’s satellite measurements, which collect temperature data from the lower atmosphere, show no statistically significant warming since 1994 — a period of 21 years.

“We prefer satellite data because it’s a measurement of the bulk atmosphere,” Christy said, adding this is where global warming should be most apparent. Satellites also don’t need to go through the level of adjustments surface thermometers do.

Watts’ study is likely to be challenged by the global warming “establishment” because it challenges data they believe supports the idea that greenhouse gases are pushing the world towards dangerous warming.

“If you want the truth about an issue, would you go to an agency with political appointees?” Christy said. “The government is not the final word on the truth.” (DC)

Political Cartoons by Ken Catalino
Political Cartoons by Jerry Holbert
Political Cartoons by Chip Bok
Political Cartoons by Ken Catalino

Why They Do it

Global Warming: The United Nations climate summit was billed as the meeting that would save the world. But that’s not what the conference delegates want — their goal is to fundamentally transform the world.

Obama said in 2008 that he planned to “Fundamentally Transform America.” He has remained true to that promise.

In the days leading up to the 21st session of the Conference of Parties to the U.N.’s Framework Convention on Climate Change, hardly a living person could avoid hearing the desperate talk about the Paris summit being our last chance to save the world from global warming . It was all a pretense, however, because what the global warming alarmist community says it wants isn’t what it truly hungers for.

Like most things with Liberals, deceit and fear is the only way for them.

The U.N.’s many climate meetings and its interest in climate through the years have nothing to do with warming, climate, weather or the environment.

The goal has always been to wreck capitalism , punish prosperous economies that became rich through free markets, reward poorer nations that are impoverished by policies that starve markets, and reshape the world in the image of left-wing thought.

Don’t believe it? It’s right there in the U.N.’s own documents.

The “Draft conclusions proposed by the Co-Chairs,” distributed on Dec. 5, confirms that the parties of a climate agreement are united in “emphasizing the importance of promoting, protecting and respecting all human rights, the right to development, the right to health, and the rights of indigenous peoples, migrants, children, persons with disabilities and people in vulnerable climate situations (and under occupation).”

The draft also underscores the need to promote “gender equality and the empowerment of women, while taking into account the needs of local communities, intergenerational equity concerns, and the integrity of ecosystems and of Mother Earth, when taking action to address climate change.”

Yes, that’s Mother Earth with an upper-case M and upper-case E.

The same document refers as well to “the imperatives of a just transition of the workforce and the creation of decent work and quality jobs in accordance with nationally defined development priorities.”

All of these issues being “emphasized” and “taken into account” are goals the political left has pursued for decades, and all require more government intervention into private affairs. This is what the global warming scare is about. It’s not about rescuing cities from encroaching seas, saving populations from drought, preventing “dirty weather ” or protecting polar bears.

Look at those around the world who are advancing the global warming scare. The movement is led, and followed by, figures from the political left who loathe capitalism, are repulsed by the wealth in advanced economies and want to exercise control over their fellow humans. The talk about climate change is a smoke screen to cover their true ambitions.

The Paris climate summit was to end this weekend, with a deal likely struck. The nabobs will claim victory, but that won’t end the hectoring. By the time spring rolls around, they’ll again be claiming the 2016 Morocco summit will be the last chance to save the world. (IBD)

And they did.

Do it our way, give us you life, or else!

Political Cartoons by Glenn McCoy
Political Cartoons by Michael Ramirez

Failing Grade

Despite all the catastrophic hyperbole tossed around leading up to the climate mega-conference in Paris, the American public is not paying much attention. For months we have been warned by the prophets of doom, that the United Nation’s climate conference marks the final and best chance for humanity to save itself from certain destruction. We are told that if the 2015 Conference of the Parties (COP21) fails to deliver a major climate change treaty, the world will have missed the last opportunity to mitigate global warming and avert a worldwide disaster. To save ourselves, we simply need our collective governments to agree to impose regulations that change our lifestyles, downgrade our standards of living, and sacrifice our economies. But the alarmist sales job isn’t working, and any binding agreement is highly unlikely to emerge from Paris.

Environmentalists are frustrated. They’ve worked so hard, for so long, to get the U.S. onboard with a binding international climate treaty. So far every attempt has failed, in large part because the American public is not convinced. The main problem with alarmist propaganda of the last two decades is that they can only cry wolf so many times before the public begins to doubt the story. Al Gore’s Academy Award winning documentary “An Inconvenient Truth” proved to be short on truth. A British court went so far as to identify nine scientific errors in the film, and mandate that it could only be shown in British schools with guidance notes to prevent political indoctrination.

For years Hollywood environmental crusaders such as Leonardo DiCaprio, Arnold Schwarzenegger, Robert Redford, Harrison Ford and Sean Penn, have used their fame to try to influence public opinion about global warming. But for all their alarmist drama, a new Washington Post/ABC poll shows that today only about 47 percent believe the government should do more to deal with global warming, down from 61 percent in 2008. According to Schwarzenegger in an interview last week with the Sacramento Bee, it’s all because of a failure to communicate, “I think it is sad the way, you know, the miscommunication about climate change, because so many times, you know, you hear … that the oceans will rise, and the sea levels are rising and the temperature’s rising and the icebergs’ melting, and it’s all stuff that people cannot even relate to,” Schwarzenegger said, “I mean, our brain is not wired that way, that we’re worried about things that are happening in 2050, or 50 years from now. It’s wired about what’s happening today, and no one – even the top environmental officials – really communicates this the right way.” Of course, if the public is too dumb to understand something so important, then governments need to be convinced to make decisions for them, which is why Schwarzenegger, Robert Redford and Sean Penn are taking the stage in Paris this week.

Environmentalists have tried the political route to stir up support. They hoped they could turn global warming into a major campaign issue and elect candidates who agree with their agenda. They spent tens of millions on this endeavor in 2014 – and failed. Billionaire environmentalist Tom Steyer alone spent $58 million and saw almost every candidate he backed defeated. When his PAC, NextGen Climate Action Committee, realized the millions they spent on climate alarm ads weren’t moving the numbers, they were forced to switch to ads on social issues and the economy. A 2014 Gallup poll showed climate change ranked 13th as an issue of importance, with only 40 percent of voters identifying climate change as either “very important” or “extremely important” to their votes. Only 3% of voters rank climate change as the number one election issue.

 

Mainstream media outlets have provided an echo chamber for climate fear mongering. They enthusiastically play along with every attempt to link global warming to the latest weather pattern or tragedy. This week’s headlines offer great examples; The Clock is Ticking Toward Climate Catastrophe (Yahoo News), Climate Change is a Form of Terror (CNN), COP21: Humanity’s Last-Chance Saloon (Huffington Post), Obama: Climate change could lead to rise in extremism (The Hill), Climate Change: 48-page document could save the planet (CNN.com<http://cnn.com>), If the Republicans Destroy Our Planet, Blame It on the Devil (Haaretz), Faith communities organize to save the planet at COP21 (National Observer). But for all their combined efforts to raise public concern, a poll recently conducted by GlobeScan in 20 top industrial countries showed a 13 point drop since 2009 in those who view climate change as a “very serious” issue.

President Obama, intent on making climate change a legacy issue, has used his bully pulpit to amplify climate alarmism and to demagogue warming deniers. He began his second term with a State of the Union speech claiming climate change is the “greatest threat to the nation.” Then, following the Paris terror attacks, he used the opportunity to make a bizarre reference about Islamic terrorist’s opposition to COP21, “What a powerful rebuke to the terrorists it will be, when the world stands as one and shows that we will not be deterred from building a better future for our children.” One could almost infer that the President was suggesting the terror attacks in Paris were an attempt to deter world leaders from tackling global warming. A new Economist/YouGov poll shows only 8 percent of Republicans, 19 percent of Independents, and 25 percent of Democrats believe there is any connection between climate change and an increase in terrorism.

Pope Francis triggered new enthusiasm with environmentalists when he took up the mantle of an eco-evangelist. Perhaps by making global warming a religious moral issue, many in the public would finally have a climate change conversion. In anticipation of the Paris climate conference the Pope rolled out his encyclical teaching on global warming earlier this year, and has used every opportunity to implore the world to adopt the Paris accord. His encyclical frames the fight against CO2 emissions as a moral imperative for the Catholic Church. Fossil fuels are characterized as the embodiment of evil. On Sunday he prayed, “For the sake of the common home we share and for future generations, every effort should be made in Paris to mitigate the impact of climate change and, at the same time, to tackle poverty and to let human dignity flourish.” If the Pope’s prayer were answered it would be unfortunate for the poor. The U.N.’s regulation of fossil fuels would have the greatest negative impact on the quality of life for those who are more concerned about immediate nourishment and shelter than anthropogenic climate model projections.

Despite the Pope’s climate sermons, impoverished countries know how much their economies and citizens depend on access to affordable fossil fuels. It’s the key reason they won’t sign on to an equivalent deal without the extracting a long-term financial prize from wealthy nations. The religious dogma hasn’t inspired a host of new believers. According to a recent Pew Research Center poll, around 47 percent of Catholics, attributed global warming to human causes, and less than half viewed it as a very serious problem. The demographic groups least concerned about global warming happen to be religious communities – white Catholics and white evangelicals.

So what’s the deal? Why all the climate apathy and global warming denial? Is Arnold Schwarzenegger right – a majority of people are simply too ignorant to understand what they are being told? I don’t believe it’s a communication problem. I believe it’s a science problem, and a global warming solutions problem. Global warming alarmists are masters of propaganda. They have employed the most Orwellian tactics in their attempt to produce a seismic shift in the American conscious over global warming.

The fact that alarmists effectively changed the basic term of the debate from “global warming” to the catch all term “climate change,” even though the science they continue to reference is all about warming, is revealing. First, it should make us all skeptics. If global warming was an undisputed fact, evidenced by Al Gore’s warming predictions actually becoming reality, alarmists wouldn’t need to change the term to “climate change.” It also reveals how shrewd they are with their warming rhetoric. Climate change is a convenient catch all propaganda term for alarmists. It encompasses every weather related event, every storm, every drought. It can be twisted and distorted to mean almost anything. Even war and terrorism can now be blamed on the weather. But after all the manipulative word games, millions of dollars spent on promoting global warming ideology, celebrity prattle, and a U.S. President who claims that global warming is the greatest threat to mankind – public opinion appears to be, at best, stagnant or shifting in the opposite direction.

When 150 world leaders gather to discuss something, that something must a real big deal. But the world is giving a collective yawn to the international confab in Paris. That’s a mistake. We should pay attention, not because the alarmists are correct with their predictions of a global warming Armageddon, but because three quarters of the world’s leaders are attending a meeting for the purpose of inking an agreement to significantly change our quality of life, strangle our economy, eliminate jobs, and provide billions of taxpayer dollars to developing country’s economies in the form of green bribes.

If you aren’t a skeptic about global warming science, you should be a skeptic about global warming solutions. Take a few minutes and browse the U.N.’s Framework Convention on Climate Change (unfccc.int<http://unfccc.int/>), or their blueprint for sustainable development, Agenda 21 (sustainabledevelopment.un.org<https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/content/documents/Agenda21.pdf>). It’s big government on steroids, imposing international regulations on almost every component of our lives. It uses climate change as an excuse for government to address every Leftist issue imaginable, from wealth redistribution to empowering unions, to feminism. It’s not compatible with the U.S. Constitution, our democracy or our ideals. There are many nuances to the art of twisting the facts to influence opinions and behavior, but political propaganda is most effective when its target audience fails to recognize the persuasive tactics being employed and how they shape the public’s beliefs. It’s been said that “eternal vigilance is the price of liberty.” When it comes to climate propaganda, and meetings like COP21, Americans should all be very vigilant. A binding U.N. climate treaty would prove to be a real man-made global disaster. (David Spady)

Save us from The Chicken Little Orwellian Dictator Wanna-be’s.

Political Cartoons by Glenn McCoy
Political Cartoons by Michael Ramirez
Political Cartoons by Nate Beeler

The Chicken Little Hypocrisy Rebuke

Ragnarok will come someday, tomorrow, come someday,tomorrow,come someday. Ragnarok will come someday and we’ll all be killed.

Unless you give all your rights, freedoms, and your money and do exactly as we say when we say it because we say it!

DO as we Say, not as we Do and Do It Yesterday!

“This year, in Paris, has to be the year that the world finally reaches an agreement to protect the one planet that we’ve got while we still can,” said U.S. President Barack Obama on his recent trip to Alaska. Miguel Cañete, the EU’s chief negotiator, has warned there is “no Plan B — nothing to follow. This is not just ongoing UN discussions. Paris is final.”

The Apocalypse is here. Never Let a Crisis, even one you make up, go to waste.

The world is doomed if you don’t submit!

Conventional wisdom holds that negotiators are hashing out a fair allocation of the deep emissions cuts all countries would need to make to limit warming. That image bears little resemblance to reality.

In fact, emissions reductions are barely on the table at all. Instead, the talks are rigged to ensure an agreement is reached regardless of how little action countries plan to take. The developing world, projected to account for four-fifths of all carbon-dioxide emissions this century, will earn applause for what amounts to a promise to stay on their pre-existing trajectory of emissions-intensive growth.

Here’s how the game works: The negotiating framework established at a 2014 conference in Lima, Peru, requires each country to submit a plan to reduce greenhouse-gas emissions, called an “Intended Nationally Determined Contribution” (INDC). Each submission is at the discretion of the individual country; there is no objective standard it must meet or emissions reduction it must achieve.

Beyond that, it’s nearly impossible even to evaluate or compare them. Developing countries actually blocked a requirement that the plans use a common format and metrics, so an INDC need not even mention emissions levels. Or a country can propose to reduce emissions off a self-defined “business-as-usual” trajectory, essentially deciding how much it wants to emit and then declaring it an “improvement” from the alternative. To prevent such submissions from being challenged, a group of developing countries led by China and India has rejected “any obligatory review mechanism for increasing individual efforts of developing countries.” And lest pressure nevertheless build on the intransigent, no developing country except Mexico submitted an INDC by the initial deadline of March 31 — and most either submitted no plan or submitted one only as the final September 30 cut-off approached.

After all this, the final submissions are not enforceable, and carry no consequences beyond “shame” for noncompliance — a fact bizarrely taken for granted by all involved.

So it’s just The Agenda is The Agenda, and my don’t we look wonderful for “doing something” when in fact it’s all just a gigantic redistribution con.

But MIT’s Joint Program on the Science and Policy of Global Change calculates the improvement by century’s end to be only 0.2 degrees Celsius. Comparing projected emissions to the baseline established by the UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change back in 2000 shows no improvement at all.

And therein lies the sticking point on which negotiations actually center: “climate finance.” Climate finance is the term for wealth transferred from developed to developing nations based on a vague and shifting set of rationales including repayment of the “ecological debt” created by past emissions, “reparations” for natural disasters, and funding of renewable energy initiatives.

The issue will dominate the Paris talks. The INDCs covering actual emissions reductions are subjective, discretionary, and thus essentially unnegotiable. Not so the cash. Developing countries are expecting more than $100 billion in annual funds from this agreement or they will walk away. (For scale, that’s roughly equivalent to the entire OECD budget for foreign development assistance.)

Somehow, the international process for addressing climate change has become one where addressing climate change is optional and apparently beside the point. Rich countries are bidding against themselves to purchase the developing world’s signature on an agreement so they can declare victory — even though the agreement itself will be the only progress achieved. (Politico.eu)

The climate change summit in Paris that aims to tackle global warming will itself pump an estimated 300,000 tons of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere, it was claimed today.

Around 50,000 people including world leaders, businesses and activists are expected to travel from across the globe for the two-week conference in Paris which started today.

Most will arrive by plane from as far afield as New Zealand, Sydney and Bermuda, while others will arrive by train and car.

According to calculations by Wired and Steven Stoft of climateParis.org, the average round trip per attendee will be around 9,000 miles.

Taking the fuel consumption of a Boeing 747 – around 16.5 miles per gallon – which the website describes as a ‘happy medium between private jets and bullet trains’, it is estimated around 27 million gallons of fuel will be used by travellers attending the conference. 

This figure was arrived at by multiplying the number of attendees by the average round-trip mileage to get 450million miles then multiplying that by 16.5miles per gallon.

With each gallon of fuel producing around 21 pounds of carbon dioxide, the total released by planes flying to and from Paris is thought to be about 575million pounds (290,000 tons), according to rough calculations.

But given that some planes will very likely carry more than one attendee, this figure is likely to be at the very highest end. 

The total still pales in comparison with the annual global output of 80 quadrillion pounds, meaning the Paris conference equates to around 22 seconds of the world’s production. 

In an opening speech at the summit, Prince Charles warned world leaders that ‘we are becoming the architects of our own destruction’ as he called for immediate action to halt global warming.

The heads of 151 nations have kicked off 12 days of talks in Paris in search of an elusive pact that would wean the world off fossil fuels, making it the largest gathering of global leaders in history.

The Prince of Wales urged them to ‘think of your grandchildren, as I think of mine’ as well as the billions of people without a voice and the youngest generation as they try to secure a new global deal. 

He said: ‘If the planet were a patient, we would have treated her long ago. 

‘You, ladies and gentlemen, have the power to put her on life support and you must surely start the emergency procedures without further procrastination.

‘Humanity faces many threats but none is greater than climate change. In damaging our climate we are becoming the architects of our own destruction. 

‘We have the knowledge, the tools and the money (to solve the crisis).’

Over the next fortnight negotiators from 195 countries will attempt to hammer out a deal that will put the world on a path to prevent temperatures rising by more than 2C above pre-industrial levels and avoid dangerous climate change. 

French President Francois Hollande later echoed his statement by telling leaders that ‘the hope of all of humanity’ rested on their shoulders.

And anyone who stands in their way is evil and wants to destroy mankind, naturally. 🙂 No hyperbole there.

In an opening speech at the conference centre in Paris, the French President said: ‘Never have the stakes of an international meeting been so high because it concerns the future of the planet, the future of life. The hope of all of humanity rests on all of your shoulders.’  

Barack Obama also painted a dire picture of the future without aggressive action to curb carbon emissions, describing submerged countries, abandoned cities and fields that won’t grow.

In a speech, he said: ‘As the leader of the world’s largest economy and the second largest (greenhouse gas) emitter… the United States of America not only recognises our role in creating this problem, we embrace our responsibility to do something about it.’

The U.S. President also called the climate talks an ‘act of defiance’ by the world community following the Islamic State-linked attacks two weeks ago. 

The Islamic Radicals who want to kill you don’t care about your green defiance. Not one bit. As a matter of fact they are making an estimated $5 million dollars a day off of the profits from the oil fields you refuse to bomb because of your environmentalist radicalism. 🙂

Political Cartoons by Michael Ramirez

Chinese President Xi Jinping said an eventual global climate deal must include aid for poor countries and acknowledge differences between developing and established economies. 

Xi, speaking at U.N.-led climate talks near Paris on Monday, said an agreement should also include transfer of climate technology to developing countries.

He said a deal should accommodate national interests, adding: ‘It’s imperative to respect differences’ among countries, especially developing ones.

‘Addressing climate change should not deny the legitimate needs of developing countries to reduce poverty and improve living standards,’ he said.

World leaders had earlier held a moment of silence in honor of people killed in recent attacks in Paris, Beirut, Baghdad, Tunisia and Mali.

The U.N. climate conference in Paris is most likely humanity’s last chance to thwart global environmental disaster, Pope Francis said on Monday, warning the world was “at the limits of suicide”.

The pope, who wrote a major document on the environment last June, made the comment in an hour-long news conference aboard the plane returning him to Rome at the end of a six-day trip to Africa.

The freewheeling conversations have become a trademark of his papacy and the few times he takes direct questions from journalists.

Francis, who visited Kenya, Uganda and the Central African Republic, also said the continent was “a martyr of exploitation” by wealthy countries who lust after its natural resources and try to impose Western values instead of concentrating on development.

The pope was asked if the U.N. climate summit in Paris would mark a turnaround in the fight against global warming.

“I am not sure, but I can say to you ‘now or never’,” he said. “Every year the problems are getting worse. We are at the limits. If I may use a strong word I would say that we are at the limits of suicide.”

He spoke of retreating glaciers in Greenland and low-lying countries at risk from rising sea levels.

“I am sure that the (Paris delegates) have goodwill to do something. I hope it turns out this way and I am praying that it will,” he said. (Daily Mail)

An echo chamber of activist groups and media outlets stands ready to rubber-stamp the final agreement as “historic,” validating the vast reservoirs of political capital spent on the exercise.

It’s a redistribution shell game to make Leftists and Socialists “feel good” about “doing something” thus validating their superiority.

And you get to pay for the privilege of being a serf under their rule.
Worry, they are happy. Don’t worry, they don’t care if you suffer.
It’s all about their power over you and their superiority in their own minds.
They are, after all, Homo Superior Liberalis, and you’re not, SERF.
Political Cartoons by Michael Ramirez
Political Cartoons by Dana Summers
Political Cartoons by Glenn Foden

Global Cooling?

I’m so confused. First it was Cooling (1970’s), the Warming (1980s-early 2000’s) then “Climate Change” “Warming” (last few years).

Now it’s back to Cooling?

Just as all the little environmental dictators get together to have an Apocalyptic Warming Conference where they all agree that they should run everyone and everything and make everyone poor and only they’ll be rich. It’s for your own good. 🙂

They call the Conference by the telling name of COP 21. COP, Freaudian slip? 🙂

Ice-4-382335

SCIENTISTS claim we are in for a decade-long freeze as the sun slows down solar activity by up to 60 per cent.

A team of European researchers have unveiled a scientific model showing that the Earth is likely to experience a “mini ice age” from 2030 to 2040 as a result of decreased solar activity.

Their findings will infuriate environmental campaigners who argue by 2030 we could be facing increased sea levels and flooding due to glacial melt at the poles.

However, at the National Astronomy Meeting in Wales, Northumbria University professor Valentina Zharkova said fluctuations an 11-year cycle of solar activity the sun goes through would be responsible for a freeze, the like of which has not been experienced since the 1600s.

From 1645 to 1715 global temperatures dropped due to low solar activity so much that the planet experienced a 70-year ice age known as Maunder Minimum which saw the River Thames in London completely frozen. 

The researchers have now developed a “double dynamo “model that can better predict when the next freeze will be.

Based on current cycles, they predict solar activity dwindling for ten years from 2030.

Professor Zharkova said two magnetic waves will cancel each other out in about 2030, leading to a drop in sun spots and solar flares of about 60 per cent.

Sunspots are dark concentrations of magnetic field flux on the surface that reduce surface temperature in that area, while solar flares are burst of radiation and solar energy that fire out across the solar system, but the Earth’s atmosphere protects us from the otherwise devastating effects.

She said: “In cycle 26, the two waves exactly mirror each other, peaking at the same time but in opposite hemispheres of the Sun. 

“We predict that this will lead to the properties of a ‘Maunder minimum.

“Over the cycle, the waves fluctuate between the Sun’s northern and southern hemispheres. Combining both waves together and comparing to real data for the current solar cycle, we found that our predictions showed an accuracy of 97 per cent.”

Research colleagues Simon Shepherd of Bradford University, Helen Popova of Lomonosov Moscow State University and Sergei Zarkhov of the University of Hull used magnetic field observations from 1976 to 2008 at the Wilcox Solar Observatory at Stanford University.

A Royal Astronomical Society spokesman said: “It is 172 years since a scientist first spotted that the Sun’s activity varies over a cycle lasting around 10 to 12 years. 

The theory is likely to infuriate environmentalists who fear the globe is heating up.

I HOPE SO. 🙂

“But every cycle is a little different and none of the models of causes to date have fully explained fluctuations.”

The “double dynamo” theory appears to support claims of researchers who argue Earth will soon experience major global cooling due to lower solar activity as the sun goes into a sustained period of hibernation.

Environmentalists meanwhile claim global temperatures will increase over the period unless we drastically reduce carbon emissions.

DO AS WE SAY OR YOU’RE ALL DOOMED! 🙂

The Pol on the website so far:

Do you think the world will get hotter or colder from 2030?

Yes, by the sound of it we are in for a very long winter   43%

No, I believe that the Earth is gradually heating up and we are responsible so have to cut carbon   3%

I think it could go either way and will carry on fluctuating   26%

Why worry, it is out of our hands   24%

Even if there is a mini ice age after it will keep warming in the long run  4%

Since the people ain’t buying it’s up to the Politicians to force them to, after all that’s how Science works. 🙂

 

 

 

Follow The Money

Environmentalists like to claim skeptics are making money off hampering global warming regulations, but those same activists are making a lot of money promoting global warming alarmism.

A recent video from The Guardian claims that there is little money or power to be gained from environmental activism. The money behind activism pales in comparison to those of their fossil fuel-financed opposition, according to the video. The video even claims that “most of the money in solar and wind power comes from savings to the consumer.”

In the case of Al Gore, prominently featured in the video, the former vice president has levied his global warming activism from a net worth of $700,000 in 2000 into an estimated net worth of $172.5 million by 2015. He’s not alone in his financial endeavor.

Funding of science, in this particular case, climate change science, is dominated by the federal government. We assert that this will cause recipients of [government] grants to publish findings that are in-line with government policy preferences (i.e., don’t bite the hand that feeds you),” Chip Knappenberger, the assistant director of the Center for the Study of Science at the libertarian Cato Institute, told The Daily Caller News Foundation in an email.

After a while, the scientific literature becomes dominated by these types of research findings which then produces a biased knowledge base,” Knappenberger said. “This knowledge base is then ‘assessed’ by intergovernmental and federal science committees (i.e., IPCC, USGCRP) to produce authoritative reports that supposedly represent the scientific ‘consensus,’ which is then tapped by the federal government in determining policy and setting regulations, such as the CPP [Clean Power Plan].”

A Cycle of Financial and Political Incest. One feeds the other.

Studies that receive financial support from the public sector don’t have to disclose it as a conflict of interest, even when that support is in the millions of dollars. Recent studies that the Environmental Protection Agency is using to support the scientific case for its Clean Power Plan saw the EPA itself give $31.2 million, $9.5 million, and $3.65 million in public funds to lead authors according to EPA public disclosures.

The author who received $3.65 million, Charles Driscoll, even admitted to the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette that the result of his study was predetermined, saying “in doing this study we wanted to bring attention to the additional benefits from carbon controls.”

Universities typically received about 50 percent of the money that their researchers get in public funds if their research finds positive results, making them deeply dependent upon federal funding and likely to encourage studies which will come to conclusions that the government wants.

Even counting only private money, environmental groups massively outspend their opposition. Opposition to global warming activism only raises $46 million annually across 91 conservative think tanks according to analysis by Forbes. That’s almost 6 times less than Greenpeace’s 2011 budget of $260 million, and Greenpeace is only one of many environmental groups. The undeniable truth is that global warming activists raise and spend far more money than their opponents.

And money talks and Bullshit Science walks away with “consensus”.

Attempts by governments to encourage solar and wind power have created incentives for corruption that even environmentalists acknowledge. The push to encourage “green” systems has already led to serious corruption, such as the Solyndra scandal, which “crowds out” investment dollars that could be better spent on more workable solutions. (Libertarian Republic)

THE AGENDA IS THE AGENDA.

THE NARRATIVE IS THE NARRATIVE.

The End. 🙂

Political Cartoons by Steve Breen

Destroying the Vote

Voter ID laws have been challenged because liberal Democrats deem them racist. I guess that’s because they see blacks as being incapable of acquiring some kind of government-issued identification. Interesting enough is the fact that I’ve never heard of a challenge to other ID requirements as racist, such as those: to board a plane, open a charge account, have lab work done or cash a welfare check. Since liberal Democrats only challenge legal procedures to promote ballot-box integrity, the conclusion one reaches is that they are for vote fraud prevalent in many Democrat-controlled cities.

Cheaters never win, unless they are Democrats. 🙂

Winning is everything, so it’s ok to cheat.

The Agenda is The Agenda.

There is another area where the attack on ballot-box integrity goes completely unappreciated. We can examine this attack by looking at the laws governing census taking. As required by law, the U.S. Census Bureau is supposed to count all persons in the U.S. Those to be counted include citizens, legal immigrants and non-citizen long-term visitors. The law also requires that illegal immigrants be a part of the decennial census. The estimated number of illegal immigrants ranges widely from 12 million to 30 million. Official estimates put the actual number closer to 12 million.

Both citizens and non-citizens are included in the census and thus affect apportionment counts. Counting illegals in the census undermines one of the fundamental principles of representative democracy — namely, that every citizen-voter has an equal voice. Through the decennial census-based process of apportionment, states with large numbers of illegal immigrants, such as California and Texas, unconstitutionally gain additional members in the U.S. House of Representatives thereby robbing the citizen-voters in other states of their rightful representation.

Hans von Spakovsky, a Heritage Foundation scholar and former member of the Federal Election Commission, has written an article, “How Noncitizens Can Swing Elections: Without Even Voting Illegally.” He points to the fact that 12 million illegal aliens, plus other aliens who are here legally but are not citizens and have no right to vote, distort representation in the House. Spakovsky cites studies by Leonard Steinhorn of American University, scholars at Texas A&M University and the Center for Immigration Studies. Steinhorn’s study lists 10 states that are each short one congressional seat that they would have had if apportionment were based on U.S. citizen population: Indiana, Iowa, Louisiana, Michigan, Missouri, Montana, North Carolina, Ohio, Oklahoma and Pennsylvania.

On the other hand, states with large numbers of illegal aliens and other non-citizens have congressional seats they would not have had. They are: California (five seats), Florida (one seat), New York (one seat), Texas (two seats) and Washington state (one seat). Moreover, the inflated population count resulting from the inclusion of illegal immigrants and other non-citizens increases the number of votes some states get in the Electoral College system, affecting the actual process of electing the president of the United States.

There is a strong argument for counting non-citizens, whether they are here legally or illegally. An accurate population count is important for a number of public policy reasons as well as national security — we should know who is in our country. But as professor Mark Rozell, acting dean of the School of Policy, Government, and International Affairs at George Mason University, and Paul Goldman, a weekly columnist for the Washington Post, say in their Politico article, there is no “persuasive reason to allow the presence of illegal immigrants, unlawfully in the country, or noncitizens generally, to play such a crucial role in picking a president.”

Hans von Spakovsky concludes his article saying, “It is a felony under federal law for a noncitizen to vote in our elections because voting is a right given only to American citizens. It is a precious right that must be earned by becoming a citizen. Giving aliens, particularly those whose first act was to break our laws to illegally enter the country, political power in Congress and allowing them to help choose our president strike at the very heart of our republic and what it means to be an American.” (Walter E Williams)

But the Democrats are counting on these people and the Zombie hoard that would vote for Adolf Hitler if he had a (D) next to his name to vote them into office regardless.

The Agenda is The Agenda!

Political Cartoons by Nate Beeler
Political Cartoons by Robert Ariail
Political Cartoons by Henry Payne
Political Cartoons by Henry Payne

The Court of AGW

At the upcoming United Nations Climate Summit in Paris, participating nations have prepared a treaty that would create an “International Tribunal of Climate Justice” giving Third World countries the power to haul the U.S. into a global court with enforcement powers.

Congress would be bypassed – left out in the cold – by this climate deal, critics say.

Policies once left to sovereign nations could be turned over to a U.N. body if the U.S. and its allies approve the proposed deal in Paris during the summit scheduled for Nov. 30-Dec. 11.

According to the proposed draft text of the climate treaty, the tribunal would take up issues such as “climate justice,” “climate finance,” “technology transfers,” and “climate debt.”

Buried on page 19 of the 34-page document is the critical text – still heavily bracketed with text that hasn’t been completely resolved and agreed upon – reads:

[An International Tribunal of Climate Justice as][A] [compliance mechanism] is hereby established to address cases of non-compliance of the commitments of developed country Parties on mitigation, adaptation, [provision of] finance, technology development and transfer [and][,] capacity-building[,] and transparency of action and support, including through the development of an indicative list of consequences, taking into account the cause, type, degree and frequency of non-compliance.

The U.N. held a preparatory conference in September in Bonn, Germany, that drafted language to be approved at the upcoming Paris climate summit. At the Bonn meeting the U.N. brought together more than 2,000 participants from governments, observer organizations and the media.

But none of those media chose to report on the proposed new global tribunal.

The Paris Conference is mandated to adopt “a protocol, another legal instrument or an agreed outcome with legal force under the Convention applicable to all parties,” which is to come into force in 2020, according to IISD Reporting Services, which tracks the global sustainable development movement.

Like many initiatives that come out of the U.N., there has been a media blackout on coverage of the potential for a new world tribunal that would make binding decisions on a host of issues critical to the U.S. economy. The draft text has been available on the Internet since Oct. 20 for all to see.

“The only mentions one is likely to find with search engines are alarms being sounded by critics, the climate realists who reject the apocalyptic predictions (and discredited pseudo-science – see: here, here, and here) of the multi-billion dollar global warming lobby,” writes William F. Jasper for the New American magazine.

One such critic is the Craig Rucker, executive director and co-founder of CFACT.

Rucker points out that more than 130 developing nations – “led by South Africa and instigated by China and India” – are insisting they will not sign a climate deal in Paris unless it contains massive redistribution of wealth from developed to poor nations.

“Now they want the power to haul the U.S. and its allies before a U.N. Star Chamber to enforce compliance,” Rucker writes.

He also notes that this is not the first time the U.N. has tried to insert language creating a global climate court into a U.N. climate document. It happened in 2011 at a summit in Durban but was stripped at the last minute when CFACT blew the whistle and some media outlets picked up the story.

But this time around, the globalists writing the text have substituted the world “tribunal” for “court” and insist the body will be “non-judicial.”

“The slight edit to the terminology offers little comfort,” Rucker said, cautioning that the word “tribunal” could get watered down further if it attracts too much attention.

“If the climate tribunal becomes the focus of public scrutiny, watch for the negotiators to pull a switch behind closed doors and try and accomplish the same thing by re-branding it an enforcement ‘mechanism,’” he said.

“Whatever they call it, countries who sign onto this agreement will be voting to expand the reach of the U.N. climate bureaucracy, cede national sovereignty, and create a one-way street along which billions will be redistributed from developed to poor nations,” Rucker says. “Developed nations would be expected to slash their emissions while the ‘poor’ countries expand theirs. China, which holds a trillion dollars in U.S. debt, would be counted among the poor.”

He said China and India are “delighted,” with the prospect.

“They would like nothing better than a world where the West cedes the competitive advantages their free market economies created,” Rucker writes. “They hope for a future where Asia does the manufacturing and the U.S. and Europe do the importing – until their wealth runs out, anyway.”

Obama, Kerry ‘desperate’ to claim treaty as success

Rucker said President Obama and John Kerry are desperate to claim the climate treaty as a foreign policy “success.”

“President Obama and Secretary of State Kerry are mired in foreign policy failures,” Rucker notes. “They desperately want to get this agreement signed so they can claim a victory for their legacies.

“How far are they willing to sell out American interests to get this ill-begotten agreement signed?” (WND)

THE AGENDA IS THE AGENDA

NO MATTER WHAT!

That’s how far…

Practical Politics

World savers are anything but. They always have an unspoken motive. H.L. Mencken saw the self-appointed saviors for what they were almost a century ago, when he said the “whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace alarmed (and hence clamorous to be led to safety) by menacing it with an endless series of hobgoblins, all of them imaginary.”

Never Let a Crisis Go to Waste! And never let a Crisis go away either!

The most persistent hobgoblin of the last quarter-century has been global warming, now called climate change but eventually to be known as extreme weather, or some such other fright-inducing name. The climate activists are constantly bombarding us with warnings, hectoring, hysteria, pleading and threats. Apocalyptic books have been written and shrill movies made, all in an effort to slow man’s combustion of fossil fuels.

Included among these is a new documentary “inspired” by Naomi Klein’s book “This Changes Everything: Capitalism vs. the Climate.” If the title isn’t enough to give away Klein’s motives for attacking the climate “crisis,” then a comment she makes in the trailer — please forgive: watching the entire documentary would be as agonizing as any medieval torture — should.

“So here’s the big question,” says Klein. “What if global warming isn’t only a crisis? What if it’s the best chance we’re ever going to get to build a better world?”

Then comes the threat:

“Change, or be changed.”

Klein says she “spent six years wandering through the wreckage caused by the carbon in the air and the economic system that put it there.” Clearly, it is her goal to shatter the free-market system. The climate? It’s just a vehicle, a pretext for uprooting the only economic system in history that has brought prosperity and good health.

Klein’s statement is perfectly in line with Christiana Figueres, executive secretary of United Nation’s Framework Convention on Climate Change, and in fact is almost an echo. Figueres acknowledged earlier this year that the environmental activists’ goal is not to spare the world an ecological disaster, but to destroy capitalism.

“This is the first time in the history of mankind that we are setting ourselves the task of intentionally, within a defined period of time, to change the economic development model that has been reigning for at least 150 years, since the Industrial Revolution,” Figueres said in Brussels last winter.

“This is probably the most difficult task we have ever given ourselves, which is to intentionally transform the economic development model for the first time in human history.”

Klein also calls up the specter of Chicago Mayor Rahm Emanuel, who, as Obama chief of staff, said in 2009 that “you never want a serious crisis to go to waste.”

People who are always looking for a crisis to solve are much like those who seek elective office because they want to “serve.” Their spoken motives are always a cover for the real agenda, which is so maligned that it is mentioned only by accident. (IBD)

And they are the ones who “care” unlike you rabble who piss on them for it. 🙂

And the next great “crisis”?

Red Meat.

EVIL!

Red meat After thoroughly reviewing the accumulated scientific literature,a Working Group of 22 experts from 10 countries convened by the IARC Monographs Programme classified the consumption of red meat as probably carcinogenic to humans (Group 2A), based on limited evidence that the consumption of red meat causes cancer in humans and strong mechanistic evidence supporting a carcinogenic effect.

This association was observed mainly for colorectal cancer , but associations were also seen for pancreatic cancer and prostate cancer.

Processed meat was classified as carcinogenic to humans (Group 1) (aka Cigarettes) , based onsufficient evidence inb humans that the consumption of processed meat causes colorectal cancer.

Meat is the Cigarette! Big Meat wants to kill you like like Big Tabacco! 🙂

”T hese findings further support current public health recommendations to limit intake of meat ,” says Dr Christopher Wild, Director of IARC.

“At the same time, red meat has nutritional value. Therefore, these results are important in enabling governments and international regulatory agencies to conduct risk assessments,in order to balance the risks and benefits of eatingred meat and processed meat and to provide the best possible dietary recommendations.” (IARC)

The self-righteous Leftists and Militant Politically Correct Vegans would never carry this too far, now would they? 🙂

The first shot in the Vegan War on Meat has been fired. Just watch and see…It’s for your own good, after all. 🙂

World savers are anything but. They always have an unspoken motive. H.L. Mencken saw the self-appointed saviors for what they were almost a century ago, when he said the “whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace alarmed (and hence clamorous to be led to safety) by menacing it with an endless series of hobgoblins, all of them imaginary.”

Never Let a Crisis Go to Waste!

Political Cartoons by Robert Ariail

Michael Ramirez Cartoon

Entitlement and Grievance

“The moment we begin to believe that we are doing badly because someone else is doing well, that moment that aggrievement takes over, it’s not long before his twin brother comes behind, and that would be entitlement”-Condi Rice 2012

“We need people in Washington who believe, but who believe based on the right values — personal responsibility, fiscal discipline, care for one another, strength for our armed forces and a sense of this very special, exceptional country,” –Rice

After all, when the world looks to America, they look to us
because we are the most successful economic and political
experiment in human history. That is the true basis of American
exceptionalism. You see, the essence of America, what really
unites us, is not nationality or ethnicity or religion. It is
an idea. And what an idea it is. That you can come from humble
circumstances and you can do great things, that it does not
matter where you came from, it matters where you are going.
My fellow Americans, ours has never been a narrative of
grievance and entitlement.
We have never believed that I am

doing poorly because you are doing well. We have never been
jealous of one another and never envious of each others’

And we need to give parents greater choice, particularly,
particularly poor parents whose kids, very often minorities, are
trapped in failing neighborhood schools. This is the civil
rights issue of our day.
If we do anything less, we can damage generations to
joblessness and hopelessness and life on the government dole. If we do anything less, we will endanger our global
imperatives for competitiveness. And if we do anything less, we
will tear apart the fabric of who we are and cement the turn
toward entitlement and grievance.
Condileeza Rice 2012

“America has never had a narrative of grievance. We’ve never believed ‘I am doing poorly because you’re doing well,'” she said. “The moment we begin to believe that we are doing badly because someone else is doing well, that moment that aggrievement takes over, it’s not long before his twin brother comes behind, and that would be entitlement.”– Utah 2012, campaigning for another black female running against a male Democrat.

Grace Williams explains how Black Americans need to stop acting like victims:

It is a cry of many Black Americans that ,”We have not yet reached the Promised Land.” and “When will we reach our Promised Land.” Guess what? This is the 21st century and those mantras are tired and worn out. We Black Americans must create our Promised Land through high intellectual and academic achievement in addition to a prodigious work ethic.
Sadly, many Black Americans believe that they need a savior to help them to achieve educational and socioeconomic parity. I heard that many Black Americans state that they voted for Barack Obama to be President of the United States solely because he is Black. A lot of Black Americans pinned all of their hopes and dreams on President Obama, praying and hoping that he would get them out of a hopelessly dire socioeconomic situation and into a more affluent lifestyle. Now many Black Americans are displeased with President Obama because they believed that he did not create for them the housing and jobs that he promised that he would create.Many Black Americans contend that they are blameless for the educational and socioeconomic morass they are in. This belief and ideology are not only prevalent among lower socioeconomic classes of Black Americans but also among a few middle and upper middle socioeconomic classes of Black Americans. For example, one maternal cousin once removed, who has a Master’s Degree in Psychology and is in a high-level administrative position, steadfastly maintain that “the man” is holding “us brother/sisters back”.

Every Saturday morning in my area(Harlem) without fail, in a park opposite that of my apartment complex, there are a group of Black Americans led by the Reverend Al Sharpton shouting repeatedly, ” No justice, no peace!” as if only doing this will obtain them quality education, housing, and job equality. Many Black Americans want to be rescued. It seems that they are waiting for a Great Savior to come to Earth and make everything copacetic.

Each time I go into the African-American section of Barnes & Nobles and any other book store, 75% of the books regarding the Black American cultural experience are about Black victimology and 25% of the books are about Black achievement, excellence, and self-empowerment. Many of the subjects pertaining to Black American culture on some Black-made DVDs and CDs stress Black victimology and how we are oppressed by the enemy. Seldom do I find any Black-made DVDs and CDs stressing Black education, achievement, empowerment and how to be socioeconomically successful. Finding a book on Black American culture that is not imbued with the victimization mentality is analogous to finding a needle in a haystack.

Tom Burrell, Black American author of BRAINWASHED: CHALLENGING THE MYTH OF BLACK INFERIORITY asserted that Black American students are the worst students in the country. Many Black American leaders cited institutional racism and poor socioeconomic living conditions. According to the Education Trust, only a minute 12% of Black American fourth graders were reading at their grade level and beyond; however, an abysmal 61% of Black American fourth graders lacked rudimentary reading skills.
Now let us look at the racism factor. To reiterate, yes there is institutionalized racism in this society not only against Blacks but all people of color. However, studies authenticate that Black students in Caribbean and African families outachieve Black American students in the academic arena. A second study showed that middle and upper middle class Black American high school students had similar SAT scores to lower socioeconomic class Caucasians. Regarding socioeconomic class, it has been substantiated that Asians in poor neighborhoods are high academic achievers and score high on SAT tests. So the variables of race and socioeconomic classes are declared invalid. Now, what is the underlying factor which is a determinant of the academic underachievement of the Black American student?

Many Black students are told by their parents, relatives, and peers that they are performing well “as long as they pass the course.” In the Black American student milieu, they are told that education is for nerds and to “stay real/Black” and “not to act white” i.e. being a high academic achiever. In the Black American student milieu, the high achieving Black American student is often stigmatized, ostracized, and/or worse by the lower achieving Black American student. In many Black American families, intellectualism and academic achievement is not highly prized.

Oh, look, A Secretary of State that was not only a woman, she was black, and not as corrupt and universe is wide….

BUT

since she’s a <<shudder>> CONSERVATIVE!  She must be evil and forgotten… 🙂

Political Cartoons by Henry Payne
Political Cartoons by Henry Payne
Political Cartoons by Gary Varvel
Political Cartoons by Lisa Benson
Political Cartoons by Steve Breen

The Future of America: Debate-able

Matt Walsh: It’s comforting to project all our anger onto politicians. Lord knows, they deserve a fair amount of it. However, the difficult reality is this: America’s biggest problem is its citizens, not its politicians. Indeed, its politicians are a symptom, a reflection, of its people. They may manipulate and coerce and propagandize, but when it comes down to it, in a democratic system, if a bunch of lunatics and scoundrels are in power it’s because the people chose to put them there. The sickness originates, then, with the people. And the people’s sickness is rooted in the soul.

Depressing how ignorant and narcissistic they are, many willfully so.

My mind kept going back to this fact last night as I watched the Democrat debate on CNN. To be honest, I’m not totally sure why I watched it. Clearly, a person must have some serious psychological issues if they elect to spend an evening with Bernie Sanders and Hillary Clinton. It’s like choosing to be mentally water boarded for two and a half hours. Only a troubled man would willingly subject himself to such torment. I’ll be making an appointment with a therapist later today.

That’s why I wasn’t watching. I already have high blood pressure and heart problems I didn’t their help to my grave. Plus, it would just soul-crushingly depressing watch the Liberal Media coddle these nutters and the audience applauding them for it.

But whatever my masochistic motivations, I watched, and although I wasn’t terribly surprised by anything that occurred, I was nonetheless deeply disturbed and grieved. This is what’s become of my country, I kept thinking to myself. This is America. These are mainstream, popular, beloved Democrat politicians participating in a presidential election on national TV, yet from what they’re saying, you’d be excused for assuming they were just a handful of fringe crazies campaigning to be the next leader of some hippy commune in upstate Oregon.

corrupt

There wasn’t a single good or feasible or coherent idea offered at any point from anyone not named Jim Webb. Just hard-left hokum and naked socialism, because that’s precisely what millions of American voters demand.

The want the visceral, gutteral, hatred that they’d been raised on. They didn’t want ideas, they wanted EMOTIONS.

I’m old enough to remember when Democrat politicians in national elections had to pretend to be capitalist and at least vaguely Christian and constitutionalist to get elected. Now, it’s a race to see who can play the most convincing godless commie demagogue.

I started out my voting life as a Democrat. I even voted for Jimmy Carter, to my ultimate shame.

But they don’t make Democrats like, say JFK anymore. They were exterminated.

The Far Left is “centrist” to these loons.

With the frazzled Muppet from Vermont leading the way, all of the candidates (except Jim Webb, who apparently stumbled into the wrong debate) spent the first several minutes complaining about “income inequality.”

Because that is the emotional buzzword of The Party. Forget the facts, especially about the income gap GROWING under Obama…Liberals and Democrats don’t do facts.

This was a theme they’d all return to incessantly throughout the evening, because there’s nothing more exhilarating than listening to old rich white people complain about old rich white people.

The “diversity” of it is hilarious. But it would be a thoughtcrime for that to occur to them so their brains just skip that detail none the wiser.

Bernie Sanders lamented again and again that the “middle class is collapsing,” but never expressed any interest in seeing us poor middle class folk move up and out of the middle class.

Socialism doesn’t have a middle class, by the way. Just Very rich and everyone else whose poor. Talk about “inequality”… But again, that’s facts, and facts don’t matter.

For Sanders and the rest of them, the “middle class” should be all we peons aspire to. Success and wealth ought to be solely possessed by the left wing ruling class. Wealth is evil, you see, so that’s why we should let our great and generous protectors carry the burden.

After all, they are so vastly superior!

Middle Class! Inequality! Greed! Middle Class! Inequality! Greed! I can’t really blame them for shouting socialist catchwords all night. This is what their voters desire. They don’t desire capitalism, because capitalism means opportunity and freedom, and opportunity and freedom mean hard work. Economic freedom is so unpopular among liberals that Bernie Sanders openly disavowed it to the sound of roaring applause. Clinton was hesitant (for now) to fully label herself a socialist, so instead she said she’s a sorta-capitalist who thinks “capitalism has to be saved from itself.” This is another way of calling American people children who need to be rescued by benevolent bureaucrats, but that’s OK because Democrat voters fervently wish to be treated like children. They want their own failures and struggles in life to be the fault of “the rich” and they want a president who will magically make it better.

They want their Mommy Government to make the hurt of life go away.

It’s a bit awkward, of course, because they already voted for a guy who promised to do just that, yet the “income inequality” has only gotten worse. This, as Hillary asserted several times, is still the fault of the Republicans. Even when we had a Democrat president and a Democrat Congress, all of our economic woes could be laid at the feet of Republicans and “the rich.” But not every “the rich.” Just “the rich” who aren’t Democrat politicians, or Democrat donors like Goldman Sachs and JP Morgan Chase, or union leaders, or Planned Parenthood executives, or Hollywood liberals, or university administrators, or any other group comprised mainly of wealthy left wingers.

Leftist “rich” = Good. Right-wing “rich”= Evil!

Isn’t Doublethink wonderful… 🙂

Anyway, the fact that the most prominent critics of “the rich” are themselves rich is of no concern to the Democrat voter. Consistency, logic, and sincerity are not priorities to this crew. They just want to be coddled and cuddled and soothed.

Don’t actually make them think. Thinking is too hard. Just let them have their primitive base emotions and leave it at that.

That’s why the candidates pivoted back to “inequality” and mythological, phantom issues like the gender wage gap over and over again, but never once, so far as I can remember, even mentioned the word “liberty” or “freedom.” This is where we are, culturally speaking. Five presidential contenders can spend 150 minutes blabbering on about their supposed principles and plans for America, but never once pretend to be even moderately concerned about protecting and preserving liberty.

And the Democrats watching are obliviously happy.

Why? Because Democrat voters don’t want liberty. It’s really that simple. They want easy answers and free stuff. On the free stuff end of the spectrum, all of the candidates received massive applause when they, often entirely out of nowhere and in response to completely unrelated questions, endorsed making college education free or much cheaper for citizens and non-citizens alike. And not only free college, but free health care, and more paid leave, and a doubled minimum wage.

The Narcissism of a 2 year old spoiled brat in adults. That’s a Democrat.

I felt like I was in fifth grade again watching our class president promise us bi-weekly pizza parties. Even then I knew that kind of pledge was unrealistic and disingenuous. Even then I knew the school couldn’t possible pay for 70 pizza parties if we were going on field trips to the freaking post office because they couldn’t afford to take us to the zoo or the aquarium. Even then I knew you need money for things. I was 10. Democrat voters are adults.

But they absolutely don’t know better and more importantly, DON’T WANT TO know better and will actively fight you to NOT know any better.

They want to feel protected, like a child, by their parent Government, for all the evil people of the world. The Not-We.  (Doctor Who reference).

Naturally, nobody ever explained how a country with $18 trillion of debt and over $127 trillion of unfunded liability might manage to suddenly become Santa Claus for 320 million Americans and illegals.

And they don’t care, either.

Indeed, along with “liberty,” the phrase “national debt” was never uttered. And if they weren’t going to explain how the government would start handing out full ride scholarships, paid vacations, “living wages,” and free medical care to every human being who happens to exist within our borders, they certainly wouldn’t attempt to explain why.

And the sheep don’t care. “The Rich” (the evil one version) will pay for it, naturally.

The idea that college in particular should be free is not only absurd and unworkable but incredibly offensive to any self-sufficient adult (a small minority, I admit). I’ve got news for you, my fellow young people, college isn’t a human right. It’s also not a necessity. I pay a mortgage and support a family of four by myself, with no government handouts, and I do it without a college degree. It is possible. If you can’t afford college — and God knows it’s obscenely expensive and not worth the investment for most people — don’t go. Forge your own path. Think for yourself. Do something different with your life.

But that involves potential for failure and the Liberals never prepared them for that. Hard work, is well, HARD.

It’s much easier to sit back with your iPhone, your Starbucks, and let Mama Government just give you presents all day long.

You really want to drive down college costs? That’s how you do it. You can eliminate your own college expenses by simply choosing not to take on any college expenses. Crazy how that works, isn’t it? But that’s not what liberals want to hear. They want to hear about the crusty old socialist genie who will make free stuff appear out of thin air.

Poof! Free Stuff for everyone!

The gun control portion of the debate was the most instructive. All of the candidates (except Webb, it goes without saying) fiercely and passionately competed over who most opposes the Bill of Rights and the Second Amendment. Bernie Sanders was accused — accused! — of being not completely against our Constitutional rights to keep and bare arms, and had to take great pains to assure liberal voters that these were unfounded rumors. It was a scene that would have made Thomas Jefferson weep had he been around to witness it: presidential candidates rushing to distance themselves from the Constitution.

That’s Democrats for ya…

Later, the topic turned to foreign policy, and Hillary was only tentatively and briefly asked about her role in the Benghazi fiasco. While attempting to dodge the question, the moderator interrupted and reminded her that “Americans lost their lives.” Clinton curtly shot back, “I’ll get to that,” and proceeded to explain how her policies in Libya worked out splendidly because the Libyan people were able to hold an election.

And no one missed her non-answer I bet. And no “journalist” did either.

The problem, of course, is threefold: 1) She again callously dismissed the deaths of four Americans, because, put simply, she doesn’t care about any human life that isn’t her own.

Human Life must be part of THE AGENDA in order to matter. This is the “compassionate” and “sensitive” Left at its finest.

2) She forgot to mention the “democratic Libyan government” is now in exile, hiding away on a boat in Tobruck while militias run the country.

The consequences of a Liberal’s actions never matter. The intent was good, and that’s all that natters.

3) The real issue is that Clinton and Obama were running guns through Benghazi to Syrian terrorists. This is what got our ambassador killed, and it’s why both Clinton and Obama lied about it. Obviously, this incredible scandal should be enough to disqualify someone from the presidency and land them in prison for the rest of their lives, but here in America they aren’t even asked about it during a presidential debate, much less prosecuted for it.

wanted

Instead, the candidates were told to name the biggest national security threat we face, and two of the candidates said climate change. These, I remind you, are adults running for president of the United States who believe our greatest enemy is the weather. Islamic State is overseas torturing and decapitating women and children but, according to Bernie Sanders, the real problem is that temperatures get a little balmy in the summertime. God help us.

This moment of sheer dementia was eclipsed only by a question posed later on in the debate. The candidates were asked whether “black lives matter or all lives matter,” and those who answered agreed that only black lives matter. The question alone shows you how far the Democrat Party and the culture as a whole has fallen in just the last few years. During Obama’s first run, you would have been flabbergasted by such an inquiry. Do black lives or all lives matter? What? Huh? Really? Talk about a false dichotomy.

But White People are evil. 🙂 (except the white people on the Democrat President Ticket that is). 🙂

Now you barely bat an eye at the full frontal stupidity of the question or the insanity of the answer. You aren’t in the least bit surprised that Democrat politicians cannot simply affirm the value of all human life without upsetting a significant portion of their base. When “do all lives matters?” becomes a difficult gotcha question in politics, you know things have gone severely off the rails.

Perhaps the most unsettling moment came when Clinton was asked about her decision to commit a serious federal crime by conducting classified business on her private email servers. It should be no surprise that a pathological crook who spent decades intimidating and silencing her husband’s rape victims would think this, in comparison, is rather small potatoes. That’s to be expected. It’s the Democrat voter’s cooperation that’s the real outrage here.

Clinton said the whole thing was a right wing conspiracy and then started babbling about free college tuition. Sanders got on his knees and kissed the feet of Her Highness, insisting that Clinton’s rampant criminality is a distraction. The audience of trained seals burst into applause at the sight of two powerful people agreeing that powerful people shouldn’t be required to obey the law. Then the auditorium nearly exploded in a fit of joy and exuberance at this exchange between Lincoln Chafee, who is a person who apparently exists, and Her Highness:

CHAFEE: … There’s an issue of American credibility out there. So any time someone is running to be our leader, and a world leader, which the American president is, credibility is an issue out there with the world. And we have repair work to be done. I think we need someone that has the best in ethical standards as our next president. That’s how I feel.

COOPER: Secretary Clinton, do you want to respond?

CLINTON: No.

Her Highness refusing to address her illegal activities was, by far, the most popular response, or non-response, of the night. I felt like I was watching some sort of strange reimagining of a George Orwell book. It was creepy, really.

The Democrat Playbook, and instruction manual is “1984”.

Of course, there were a few other big applause lines, like when Hillary defended the baby killers at Planned Parenthood and when Bernie promised to raise taxes (a promise he repeated 16 times or so). Hillary scored points on several occasions by noting that she has a vagina. When asked how her administration won’t be a third Obama term, the only difference she could highlight is her genitalia. Hillary has made it clear that she’ll bust out the “I’m a woman” card anytime her back is against the wall, and it will always work with her supporters because her supporters are profoundly immature.

I did say that was going to be the ploy, did I not? 🙂 Vote for Obama or you’re a racist. Vote for Hillary or you’re a sexist!

There was one genuinely good line, courtesy of the sore thumb Jim Webb. All of the candidates were asked who they’d consider their number one enemy. Chafee said he was proud to make an enemy of poor coal miners. Clinton said her greatest enemies are not Islamic State or the Iranians, but Republicans. Sanders said something about corporatebankersWallStreetyaddayadda. Webb, the Marine veteran, said his number one enemy would be the Viet Cong soldier who threw a grenade at him, but “he’s not around anymore.”

It was a fantastic moment, particularly in contrast to the fools before him who bragged about fighting with coal miners and Republicans. Webb actually fought with his life on the line and defeated his enemy on the battle field. In a Republican debate, his answer would have brought the house down, as well it should. But in a Democrat debate, it was met with awkward silence, just like the silence that followed Webb’s earlier declaration that all human lives matter.

He was NOT WE. Who let him in?

This is the Democrat Party, ladies and gentlemen. Behold it and weep. Just remember to reserve most of your disgust for the people in the audience or at home who cheered as politicians promised us death, tyranny, and free crap. To give you an idea of how enthusiastic some of these people are, consider this: I offered criticisms of the candidates on Twitter last night and one liberal responded by saying she hopes my children kill themselves (she’s since deleted her account). I got an email from a Hillary fan this morning telling me she’ll “pray” I get leukemia. You’d like to think these reactions are isolated, but they aren’t. It’s pretty common.

All too common. And this, of course, is the vaunted and much bally-hooed “Tolerance” that Liberals go on about incessantly. 🙂

The Democrat Party exists in its current state because this country is infested by evil, fear, stupidity, and hatred. Clinton and Sanders are but manifestations of it. And never forget that they are just that: manifestations. Expressions of the spiritual malady that’s eating this nation alive, not the source or cause of it.

The voter and the politician are, in the end, one and the same, both equally to blame.

Speaking of Orwell, I’m reminded of the last line in “Animal Farm”:

The creatures outside looked from pig to man, and from man to pig, and from pig to man again; but already it was impossible to say which was which.

TRUE.

And then there’s the RINO’s running the “opposition”  <snicker>… 🙂

Political Cartoons by Steve Kelley
Political Cartoons by Henry Payne