Perusing an article in Wikipedia on the subject. It has made the news in recent years, and the impression from the news was that it was a negative thing. According to the article, globalization is more popular outside the United States than within it.
Generally speaking, my impression is that the USA has been moving towards trade deals with much of the world. Hence, you have the most recent attempt, the TPA and/or TPP. One thing that has gotten my attention is the Open Borders component of this and its link to terrorism. Not to mention the concept of multiculturalism and the decline of society and mores.
The rise of Donald Trump may be connected to this in the sense that he opposes Open Borders, and seeks a more aggressive negotiation stance with the rest of the world with respect to trade agreements. I don't sense that Trump is opposed to Globalization per se, but doesn't tend to make a religion out of it.
There is an element in today's politics that does tend to make Globalization a type of religion and seeks to overturn national sovereignty. That's what makes me suspicious of both parties. Neither party is free from this, but Trump is challenging them, and that is driving their hysterical opposition to him, in my opinion.
Al Fin: "Cowboy Commentary", aka "Eat your veggies" The Flag banner is posted in order to defy those who would make patriotic symbols illegal or disreputable.
Saturday, November 28, 2015
What are the issues?
Well, to check that out, let's look at some polls, shall we?
According to Gallup ( Feb 2015 ) The top three were Government, The Economy, and Unemployment
ABC news ( Mar 2015 ) Listed 15 of top worries. Amongst the top three: Healthcare, The Economy, and Terrorism. A considerable number cited the size and scope of the government.
A more recent poll ABC/WAPO ( Nov 16-19) poll: Economy, Terrorism, Healthcare with Immigration not far behind.
Actually, Immigration and Terrorism are really the same thing. If the terrorists can't get in, they can't do any terrorism. If you control the borders, they can't get in.
The trouble with the GOP is that they think that cutting taxes is going to make the Economy roar. Nope, don't think so, and I consider myself a pretty strong conservative. They should forget about that, as taxes are not high priority right now.
Some Democrats are obsessed with taxes as well. They think taxes should be higher.
Trump has got it right on Immigration and maybe Terrorism too because the two are related. So, why all the opposition? The powers-that-be want unlimited immigration, but that only leads to Terrorism. Trump is challenging them and he is likely to win, or he will bring the house down for the GOP.
Trump's ideas on the Economy is to get "better deals" on trade. Well, I don't know. I suspect that the deals we get aren't very good, but it won't matter all that much if we were more competitive. You can't polish a turd. It's easy to understand how Trump thinks, but it is disappointing that he doesn't push things like clean coal and molten-salt reactors as a way towards a competitive advantage in trade.
Unemployment is just the Economy, so those two can be merged.
Size and Scope of Government? There's not a whole lot to go on with Trump on this one. I need to research it.
According to Gallup ( Feb 2015 ) The top three were Government, The Economy, and Unemployment
ABC news ( Mar 2015 ) Listed 15 of top worries. Amongst the top three: Healthcare, The Economy, and Terrorism. A considerable number cited the size and scope of the government.
A more recent poll ABC/WAPO ( Nov 16-19) poll: Economy, Terrorism, Healthcare with Immigration not far behind.
Actually, Immigration and Terrorism are really the same thing. If the terrorists can't get in, they can't do any terrorism. If you control the borders, they can't get in.
The trouble with the GOP is that they think that cutting taxes is going to make the Economy roar. Nope, don't think so, and I consider myself a pretty strong conservative. They should forget about that, as taxes are not high priority right now.
Some Democrats are obsessed with taxes as well. They think taxes should be higher.
Trump has got it right on Immigration and maybe Terrorism too because the two are related. So, why all the opposition? The powers-that-be want unlimited immigration, but that only leads to Terrorism. Trump is challenging them and he is likely to win, or he will bring the house down for the GOP.
Trump's ideas on the Economy is to get "better deals" on trade. Well, I don't know. I suspect that the deals we get aren't very good, but it won't matter all that much if we were more competitive. You can't polish a turd. It's easy to understand how Trump thinks, but it is disappointing that he doesn't push things like clean coal and molten-salt reactors as a way towards a competitive advantage in trade.
Unemployment is just the Economy, so those two can be merged.
Size and Scope of Government? There's not a whole lot to go on with Trump on this one. I need to research it.
Nominations are around the corner
Things will begin to happen fast as the new year approaches. Once the nominating process begins, the nominee will quickly emerge, and then the discussion will move on towards the general election prospects.
Just read some reasonable analysis from not necessarily a conservative source of information. The general opinion is that Trump can win the nomination. Funny thing is that nobody in general seems to think that he has it locked up. He has consistently been in the lead for months, now. Who else would get the nomination?
We'll see.
What is the general mood of the nation? The same as it has been, it seems. Obama has his solid support from amongst about 43%. These won't abandon him no matter what, it seems. The polls weren't much different back in 2012, and he won anyway. It would seem that the GOP could easily beat him if they could get their act together.
The key, it seems, is unity. The Democrats can stay unified, but the GOP cannot. Hence, the outcome in 2016 largely depends upon the candidate that can unify the party. That prospect doesn't look good to yours truly right now.
There are those who say that they won't vote for Trump if he gets the nomination. It may be a lot like that for Cruz as well. If either of those two win, they will have to do something to bring these people back. Then, there's Rubio. Rubio seems to be the alternative to Bush. But the conservative wing may not trust him, especially because of immigration. The party seems fractured. Can they put it together and win?
We'll see.
As for the Democrats, it is likely to be Clinton. Her husband was the candidate of change, but she has to defend the status quo that few people outside of her party seem to like.
Just read some reasonable analysis from not necessarily a conservative source of information. The general opinion is that Trump can win the nomination. Funny thing is that nobody in general seems to think that he has it locked up. He has consistently been in the lead for months, now. Who else would get the nomination?
We'll see.
What is the general mood of the nation? The same as it has been, it seems. Obama has his solid support from amongst about 43%. These won't abandon him no matter what, it seems. The polls weren't much different back in 2012, and he won anyway. It would seem that the GOP could easily beat him if they could get their act together.
The key, it seems, is unity. The Democrats can stay unified, but the GOP cannot. Hence, the outcome in 2016 largely depends upon the candidate that can unify the party. That prospect doesn't look good to yours truly right now.
There are those who say that they won't vote for Trump if he gets the nomination. It may be a lot like that for Cruz as well. If either of those two win, they will have to do something to bring these people back. Then, there's Rubio. Rubio seems to be the alternative to Bush. But the conservative wing may not trust him, especially because of immigration. The party seems fractured. Can they put it together and win?
We'll see.
As for the Democrats, it is likely to be Clinton. Her husband was the candidate of change, but she has to defend the status quo that few people outside of her party seem to like.
Friday, November 27, 2015
With respect to the latest Trump accusation
The dude on CNN claimed that the "thousands of Muslim cheering the 9.11 was debunked." Not so fast. There's the article itself that is what Trump was referring to with his gesticulations, in which brought forth the latest accusation.
The thought I had was this: Isn't this a way to deflect the issue away from the truth? Trump was saying that the article was never retracted in which it stated that there were Muslims celebrating the attack. He was saying this while he was gesticulating. So, instead of hearing Trump's defense of himself, one hears another accusation that he was making fun of a handicapped person.
In my opinion, he wasn't clearly doing that, and besides, what's getting lost in this latest accusation is corroboration of Trump's previous claims about celebrating Muslims on 9.11.
I'm going to embed it this time...
Now, I took a screenshot of the man they are referring to as being ridiculed:
If you watch, Trump gesticulates in an exaggerated way in which this guy may not be able to do. In other words, the claim is just that, it isn't proven that Trump was trying to make fun of the guy. There's no video of the guy talking. That might provide stronger evidence than this picture. If they had something stronger, why not use that? If this is the best they've got, then they've got nothing.
Not only that, there's the motivation to distract away from the real issue that Trump brought up and that was the fact that this reporter wrote that there were cheering Muslims and that Trump pointed that out, and that the media doesn't want people to think about that, but about this phony trumped up accusation.
The thought I had was this: Isn't this a way to deflect the issue away from the truth? Trump was saying that the article was never retracted in which it stated that there were Muslims celebrating the attack. He was saying this while he was gesticulating. So, instead of hearing Trump's defense of himself, one hears another accusation that he was making fun of a handicapped person.
In my opinion, he wasn't clearly doing that, and besides, what's getting lost in this latest accusation is corroboration of Trump's previous claims about celebrating Muslims on 9.11.
I'm going to embed it this time...
Now, I took a screenshot of the man they are referring to as being ridiculed:
If you watch, Trump gesticulates in an exaggerated way in which this guy may not be able to do. In other words, the claim is just that, it isn't proven that Trump was trying to make fun of the guy. There's no video of the guy talking. That might provide stronger evidence than this picture. If they had something stronger, why not use that? If this is the best they've got, then they've got nothing.
Not only that, there's the motivation to distract away from the real issue that Trump brought up and that was the fact that this reporter wrote that there were cheering Muslims and that Trump pointed that out, and that the media doesn't want people to think about that, but about this phony trumped up accusation.
Calculating the square root
Interesting thing I found on Free Republic. The discussion was about math and how it has been taught over the decades. Of course, it has been dumbed down considerably. One would hope that this is not so, but I suspect that it is.
I found this link on how to calculate square roots. Actually, I used to do this myself a long time ago. I forgot how to do my own method, which differed from this a bit. Or did I use another method to calculate something else? Anyway, I found some useful things that you can do with numbers. Kids these days? Who knows? I'm not sure that they know enough about how to wipe their own backside.
Once upon a time, I wrote a software program I attempted to market. The software program taught math through the use of simple arithmetic-- which is something similar to what is being done in calculating square roots in this example at the page link. I sent the program to a publisher who wrote back saying that I should make it a "too easy" as opposed to "too informative" because people would give up.
You wouldn't give up easily if you are sufficiently motivated. Nuff said.
Liberals make things "too easy". The good things in life require some effort. You don't get something for nothing.
I found this link on how to calculate square roots. Actually, I used to do this myself a long time ago. I forgot how to do my own method, which differed from this a bit. Or did I use another method to calculate something else? Anyway, I found some useful things that you can do with numbers. Kids these days? Who knows? I'm not sure that they know enough about how to wipe their own backside.
Once upon a time, I wrote a software program I attempted to market. The software program taught math through the use of simple arithmetic-- which is something similar to what is being done in calculating square roots in this example at the page link. I sent the program to a publisher who wrote back saying that I should make it a "too easy" as opposed to "too informative" because people would give up.
You wouldn't give up easily if you are sufficiently motivated. Nuff said.
Liberals make things "too easy". The good things in life require some effort. You don't get something for nothing.
Ted Cruz is right on climate change
Yes, he's probably right. But... You have to ask yourself a question: How does this help him win? The issue can be obfuscated out the wazzoo, so what's the Average Joe supposed to think? You can argue the point till the cows come home, but you may not get anywhere. People might do what my sister does and that is trust her feelings on the matter. Then you lose an election. The other guys who are wrong win elections like this. What do you do about it, then?
Force them to defend positions that are hard to defend. Show that there are solutions to the problems, but that instead of embracing them, the climate alarmists oppose them. Solutions such as nuclear power. Solutions such as clean coal. Instead of these, we get windmills and solar panels. You cannot run a high tech, high energy economy on windmills and solar panels. Show how their opposition to these solutions hurts the Average Joe. Then you can win over their vote and win on the issue, which is only right because these other guys are dead wrong.
Ted Cruz hasn't said anything other than climate science is a religion. Even if he is right, it doesn't matter if they believe in it anyway.
Force them to defend positions that are hard to defend. Show that there are solutions to the problems, but that instead of embracing them, the climate alarmists oppose them. Solutions such as nuclear power. Solutions such as clean coal. Instead of these, we get windmills and solar panels. You cannot run a high tech, high energy economy on windmills and solar panels. Show how their opposition to these solutions hurts the Average Joe. Then you can win over their vote and win on the issue, which is only right because these other guys are dead wrong.
Ted Cruz hasn't said anything other than climate science is a religion. Even if he is right, it doesn't matter if they believe in it anyway.
Probably worse than I thought
Those who have read this blog probably are aware of what I think of this government.
I just read something on Next Big Future's comment section that leads me to believe that it is even worse than I thought.
No links to be added, just saying what I saw. People are aware of this garbage and posted to that effect. Yep. They are screwing us because they can. It's the Tiberius Syndrome in full flower. Or perhaps not that exactly, but a government that is corrupt through and through.
What can be done about this, or is it to be expected?
Supposedly, the press investigates this stuff and the voters hold the politicians accountable. That's the theory. The facts are quite different as the media has been captured and serves the interests of the politicians. It also known as "media bias".
Not so sure that the GOP doesn't gain something from the corruption, too. They don't seem to want to oppose Obama, either.
I just read something on Next Big Future's comment section that leads me to believe that it is even worse than I thought.
No links to be added, just saying what I saw. People are aware of this garbage and posted to that effect. Yep. They are screwing us because they can. It's the Tiberius Syndrome in full flower. Or perhaps not that exactly, but a government that is corrupt through and through.
What can be done about this, or is it to be expected?
Supposedly, the press investigates this stuff and the voters hold the politicians accountable. That's the theory. The facts are quite different as the media has been captured and serves the interests of the politicians. It also known as "media bias".
Not so sure that the GOP doesn't gain something from the corruption, too. They don't seem to want to oppose Obama, either.
Time for the Hitler comparisons
Yep, The Donald is the next Führer.
You can set a clock to it, it is so reliable. We are going to fry the Muzzies, yessiree Bob. And that would be so unjust.
Update:
The New York Times says Trump will oversee a police state. Yes, indeedy. What they are scared of is that they'll have to go to jail. If there were any justice, they would indeed go to jail. But Trump won't do anything like that. Too bad he won't.
Update:
Trump may not be the nominee because of his unforced errors. The most recent one wasn't the terrorist flap, but the man he made fun of for being handicapped. That kind of thing may make people think he is unelectable. None of this is necessary. He should be running away with it by now.
Update:
There was a still pic taken of a speech he gave in which he is alleged to have made fun of a handicapped guy. It looked to me like Trump was busted, but upon watching the video, it doesn't look so bad for Trump. Once again, I think he skates on this one. Also, once again, the media is busted for hyping what they allege that Trump did. You have a different opinion? Take a look:
The media has it in for Trump, but they let Hillary skate. Trump has to defend himself on these accusations, but Hillary can say stuff like "what difference does it make?" and get praised for it.
You can set a clock to it, it is so reliable. We are going to fry the Muzzies, yessiree Bob. And that would be so unjust.
Update:
The New York Times says Trump will oversee a police state. Yes, indeedy. What they are scared of is that they'll have to go to jail. If there were any justice, they would indeed go to jail. But Trump won't do anything like that. Too bad he won't.
Update:
Trump may not be the nominee because of his unforced errors. The most recent one wasn't the terrorist flap, but the man he made fun of for being handicapped. That kind of thing may make people think he is unelectable. None of this is necessary. He should be running away with it by now.
Update:
There was a still pic taken of a speech he gave in which he is alleged to have made fun of a handicapped guy. It looked to me like Trump was busted, but upon watching the video, it doesn't look so bad for Trump. Once again, I think he skates on this one. Also, once again, the media is busted for hyping what they allege that Trump did. You have a different opinion? Take a look:
The media has it in for Trump, but they let Hillary skate. Trump has to defend himself on these accusations, but Hillary can say stuff like "what difference does it make?" and get praised for it.
Thursday, November 26, 2015
Home grown jihadis
So, Muslims would not celebrate the 9.11 attacks on American soil? This video shows that there are definitely some who would.
Is the media about the truth? Does that question really need to be answered?
h/t Free Republic
Is the media about the truth? Does that question really need to be answered?
h/t Free Republic
Bible verses
What is Christianity? Well, I figured I'd point to it, but people may not go there themselves. If they won't, here's some that give you an idea:
John 15:1, 2: I am the true vine, and my Father is the husbandman. Every branch in me that beareth not fruit, he taketh away: and every branch that beareth fruit he purgeth it, that it may bring forth more fruit.
You may have to puzzle over the archaic English to understand that Jesus is the vine, and those who stay with him will bring in more converts, and those who do not will fail. In other words, those branches that do not stay true to his teachings will die out. You see that happening today. When Whoopi Goldberg doesn't even know what Christianity is, it probably means that she doesn't understand this verse either because she hasn't read it, or is lying about it.
John 10:7 Then said Jesus unto them again, Verily, verily, I say unto you, I am the door of the sheep.
and
John 10: 11 I am the good shepherd, the good shepherd giveth his life for the sheep. But he that is a hireling, and not the shepherd, whose own the sheep are not, seeth the wolf coming, and leave the sheep, and fleeth: and the the wolf catcheth them, and scattereth the sheep.
I interpret this in the modern context that the modern "leadership", as far as it goes, do not really care anything about their people. They are in it for the money. They will allow the wolves of this world come and take their own away. Hence, the troubles with the loss of congregations in the West. None of them really teach their followers what they need to know and the "sheep" lose faith. The wolves amongst the left wing will scatter the "sheep" abroad, or in the case of Obama, will do nothing as the Mohammedans kill them.
Hitler didn't stay with his sheep until the very end. He took his life like a coward. So, Hitler was a Christian? Nope, he was more like Judas if he even rose that high.
Yet people listen to the likes of Whoopi Goldberg. Go figure.
John 15:1, 2: I am the true vine, and my Father is the husbandman. Every branch in me that beareth not fruit, he taketh away: and every branch that beareth fruit he purgeth it, that it may bring forth more fruit.
You may have to puzzle over the archaic English to understand that Jesus is the vine, and those who stay with him will bring in more converts, and those who do not will fail. In other words, those branches that do not stay true to his teachings will die out. You see that happening today. When Whoopi Goldberg doesn't even know what Christianity is, it probably means that she doesn't understand this verse either because she hasn't read it, or is lying about it.
John 10:7 Then said Jesus unto them again, Verily, verily, I say unto you, I am the door of the sheep.
and
John 10: 11 I am the good shepherd, the good shepherd giveth his life for the sheep. But he that is a hireling, and not the shepherd, whose own the sheep are not, seeth the wolf coming, and leave the sheep, and fleeth: and the the wolf catcheth them, and scattereth the sheep.
I interpret this in the modern context that the modern "leadership", as far as it goes, do not really care anything about their people. They are in it for the money. They will allow the wolves of this world come and take their own away. Hence, the troubles with the loss of congregations in the West. None of them really teach their followers what they need to know and the "sheep" lose faith. The wolves amongst the left wing will scatter the "sheep" abroad, or in the case of Obama, will do nothing as the Mohammedans kill them.
Hitler didn't stay with his sheep until the very end. He took his life like a coward. So, Hitler was a Christian? Nope, he was more like Judas if he even rose that high.
Yet people listen to the likes of Whoopi Goldberg. Go figure.
The window of opportunity will close
The Paris attacks reminded people of 9.11, and 9.11 was really bad for liberalism. It gave Bush high poll numbers for the longest time. It lead to some political defeats. Eventually, the continual drone of leftist propaganda finally managed to close the window that was opened. The same pattern is playing out now with the upcoming presidential campaign in 2016.
Will the GOP candidates be able to redirect the nation's policies away from liberalism, or will it fail again as it did with Bush?
Bush failed because he managed to fritter away the advantage that a marginalized left wing gave him. How will these candidates respond this time?
When the window closes after this latest attack, where will we be politically? This outcome may well be critical to the future of the West. The wrong answer may be the end of us.
Will the GOP candidates be able to redirect the nation's policies away from liberalism, or will it fail again as it did with Bush?
Bush failed because he managed to fritter away the advantage that a marginalized left wing gave him. How will these candidates respond this time?
When the window closes after this latest attack, where will we be politically? This outcome may well be critical to the future of the West. The wrong answer may be the end of us.
Rolling Stone: America is too dumb for TV news
This article was about to be dismissed by yours truly as nothing more than another leftist diatribe against the so-called right wing. But here's this quote that dovetails with what I've been trying to say all along on this heretofore unknown blog:
Nobody cares about the truth. It is "too dry" as my brother once told me about this blog. It doesn't come from this article either. That is, the respect for truth doesn't shine through. It is still written from the left wing perspective. The author is all too concerned about Trump's alleged lapses in truth telling, but isn't the least bit concerned that Hillary lied about the video causing a riot that killed four Americans.
If America is too dumb, could it be because the left has had all this success in dumbing down the country? The media is controlled by the left, and has been for decades. Who's fault is it then that nobody respects the truth anymore?
What gets lost in this article is how Trump's message had some truth in it. Factually, it may have been debatable as to whether or not he saw thousands of cheering Muslims on American soil on 9.11, but there have been corroborations of the fact that it did indeed happen. All the Rolling Stone guy does is whine about that fact as if the slight exaggeration was the most salient fact. What is salient about the fact is that there are terrorist sympathizers in this country and nothing is being done about it. In fact, the situation is getting worse.
It's too bad that the left doesn't seem to want anybody to know about that. There's no respect for the truth, and won't be until those who refuse to respect it are driven out of the public square.
The old Edward R. Murrow, eat-your-broccoli version of the news was banished long ago. Once such whiny purists were driven from editorial posts and the ad people over the last four or five decades got invited in, things changed. Then it was nothing but murders, bombs, and panda births, delivered to thickening couch potatoes in ever briefer blasts of forty, thirty, twenty seconds
Nobody cares about the truth. It is "too dry" as my brother once told me about this blog. It doesn't come from this article either. That is, the respect for truth doesn't shine through. It is still written from the left wing perspective. The author is all too concerned about Trump's alleged lapses in truth telling, but isn't the least bit concerned that Hillary lied about the video causing a riot that killed four Americans.
If America is too dumb, could it be because the left has had all this success in dumbing down the country? The media is controlled by the left, and has been for decades. Who's fault is it then that nobody respects the truth anymore?
What gets lost in this article is how Trump's message had some truth in it. Factually, it may have been debatable as to whether or not he saw thousands of cheering Muslims on American soil on 9.11, but there have been corroborations of the fact that it did indeed happen. All the Rolling Stone guy does is whine about that fact as if the slight exaggeration was the most salient fact. What is salient about the fact is that there are terrorist sympathizers in this country and nothing is being done about it. In fact, the situation is getting worse.
It's too bad that the left doesn't seem to want anybody to know about that. There's no respect for the truth, and won't be until those who refuse to respect it are driven out of the public square.
What is a Christian?
Whoopi Goldberg says that Hitler was a Christian. This article partially debunks that notion, but a better source would be the New Testament itself. That's where Jesus says what one must do in order to follow him. Certainly, Hitler didn't do that. Evidently those who think like Goldberg haven't read the New Testament, or don't accept what it says.
A person who wants to answer that question for themselves should read the New Testament and read William Shirer's tome about the Third Reich. Then you'll know that Hitler was no Christian, and neither is Obama.
A person who wants to answer that question for themselves should read the New Testament and read William Shirer's tome about the Third Reich. Then you'll know that Hitler was no Christian, and neither is Obama.
Wednesday, November 25, 2015
Official beginning of the holiday season
So, what I am going to do for Turkey Day? Nuthin! Maybe watch some football games. That's about it.
Maybe I'll blog here. Time for sitting on your backside and doing nothing as far as I'm concerned. Time to rest the old bones.
I was out in the traffic until about 6:40 pm or so. It's nuts to do stuff when everybody else is. I'd rather avoid the crowds.
Maybe I'll blog here. Time for sitting on your backside and doing nothing as far as I'm concerned. Time to rest the old bones.
I was out in the traffic until about 6:40 pm or so. It's nuts to do stuff when everybody else is. I'd rather avoid the crowds.
Once again, I am amazed at the media
They are shocked, shocked, that Trump said something that wasn't so. That Trump is being accused of lying hasn't even been demonstrated yet, or, for that matter, whether or not what he said is actually false. No, they accuse him of lying without having demonstrated that fact ( as best as I can tell ).
While they are doing that, they aren't shocked at Hillary's lies about Benghazi. It was demonstrated that she lied when one of her own emails was discovered that shows that she knew that the Benghazi attacks, which killed 4 Americans, was a terrorist attack instead of a video that she was claiming at the time.
The news media isn't news media when they play favorites. They are propaganda ministries, and should be regulated as such.
While they are doing that, they aren't shocked at Hillary's lies about Benghazi. It was demonstrated that she lied when one of her own emails was discovered that shows that she knew that the Benghazi attacks, which killed 4 Americans, was a terrorist attack instead of a video that she was claiming at the time.
The news media isn't news media when they play favorites. They are propaganda ministries, and should be regulated as such.
The propaganda is being pumped out a ton a second
You really have to hand it to the left wing goonie birds. They can really keep a line of bravo sierra alive for the longest time. Just checked out the Mahablog. What a load of bull that is. Can't believe I took the broad seriously for awhile. ( Only a short time in 2006 when Bush was going amnesty on us. )
I seriously considered taking her link down, but I'd be doing the same thing she did to me when she banned me from commenting on her blog. That kind of thing is in the province of the left. Wouldn't want to emulate these goonie birds. I think they are about to go extinct.
I seriously considered taking her link down, but I'd be doing the same thing she did to me when she banned me from commenting on her blog. That kind of thing is in the province of the left. Wouldn't want to emulate these goonie birds. I think they are about to go extinct.
Do the climateers want to regulate carbon or carbon dioxide?
Because carbon is a solid and carbon dioxide is a gas.
The AGW crowd needs to get its story straight. Does carbon cause climate change too, even though it isn't in the atmosphere if it is only carbon?
You see the problem here is that the words get redefined. What was understood is getting redefined constantly. You go from carbon dioxide to carbon meaning that the effort is to end all fossil fuels, which isn't necessary if all you want to do is to eliminate carbon dioxide only. Because there is more than one way to get energy out the carbon based fossil fuels. The other way doesn't need to cause carbon dioxide releases into the atmosphere. If you want to regulate carbon, then it is no longer carbon dioxide, the words got redefined.
The AGW crowd needs to get its story straight. Does carbon cause climate change too, even though it isn't in the atmosphere if it is only carbon?
You see the problem here is that the words get redefined. What was understood is getting redefined constantly. You go from carbon dioxide to carbon meaning that the effort is to end all fossil fuels, which isn't necessary if all you want to do is to eliminate carbon dioxide only. Because there is more than one way to get energy out the carbon based fossil fuels. The other way doesn't need to cause carbon dioxide releases into the atmosphere. If you want to regulate carbon, then it is no longer carbon dioxide, the words got redefined.
From the sublime to the ridiculous
Obama, aka "The Messiah", really is going to lower the sea levels AND cure AGW. This monumental bravo sierra is the one that ought to get the "Four Pinnochios" from the so-called Fact Checkers. Don't hold your breath on that one.
Update:
Also, should point out that he will whip terrorists too ( which don't exist ) all with one swift stroke. What a guy! /sarc
Update:
Maybe it was ridiculous all along. Remember Obama on a Unicorn?
Update:
Also, should point out that he will whip terrorists too ( which don't exist ) all with one swift stroke. What a guy! /sarc
Update:
Maybe it was ridiculous all along. Remember Obama on a Unicorn?
 |
| Time for some campainin' : Obama's ride on a Unicorn of 'Change' |
Who are you going to believe, me or your lying eyes?
Eyewitness to celebrating Muslims in New Jersey on 9.11
Summary: The media showed the celebrations and are now covering it up.
Comment: Doesn't surprise me. I've known the media is a bunch of liars for the longest time.
What's worse, they are claiming that they care about the truth when they are the worst liars out there. There ought to be a law against this. I know first amendment issues may prevent that, but no NEWS organization should be allowed to do it and call itself a NEWS ORGANIZATION.
Summary: The media showed the celebrations and are now covering it up.
Comment: Doesn't surprise me. I've known the media is a bunch of liars for the longest time.
What's worse, they are claiming that they care about the truth when they are the worst liars out there. There ought to be a law against this. I know first amendment issues may prevent that, but no NEWS organization should be allowed to do it and call itself a NEWS ORGANIZATION.
Tuesday, November 24, 2015
Good question
A good question is one in which the person being asked does not have an answer. Or maybe not a good answer.
Just saw this on Pundit Press blurb- a question:
"if the crime in places with strict gun laws is driven by people smuggling guns in from places with "lax" gun restrictions - why isn't crime higher in those lax places?"
Answer: Most likely there is no answer that the gun-control people can give without contradicting their political position. The gun-control people want you to believe that guns cause crime, but guns only cause crime when only the bad guys have guns. Run that one by a lefty and what do you get? You probably get called a name. Name calling is the only argument they have.
Just saw this on Pundit Press blurb- a question:
"if the crime in places with strict gun laws is driven by people smuggling guns in from places with "lax" gun restrictions - why isn't crime higher in those lax places?"
Answer: Most likely there is no answer that the gun-control people can give without contradicting their political position. The gun-control people want you to believe that guns cause crime, but guns only cause crime when only the bad guys have guns. Run that one by a lefty and what do you get? You probably get called a name. Name calling is the only argument they have.
Back on the road
There has been a bit of a drop off in posting. The reason for that is that I went back to the delivery job yesterday. Yep. Spent 14 hours out there yesterday. Another day like that and I will be on the shelf again.
Can't hack that kind of pace anymore. Well, I was pretty conflicted about going back. I knew that this is getting to be a bit too much for me. But I have to work. I'm not rich, you know.
Don't like to complain, but that's how it is. At this age, you need to slow down a bit. I wonder if the boss really understands that. He's not exactly a spring chicken himself.
The thought occurred to me to quit the blog. It may be hard to believe that such a small amount of writing could take up so much time. People are spoiled. It takes a lot of effort to put out something everyday. Especially if you've got other things to do. My plate is pretty full.
I'll keep going, but the going is getting tougher.
Can't hack that kind of pace anymore. Well, I was pretty conflicted about going back. I knew that this is getting to be a bit too much for me. But I have to work. I'm not rich, you know.
Don't like to complain, but that's how it is. At this age, you need to slow down a bit. I wonder if the boss really understands that. He's not exactly a spring chicken himself.
The thought occurred to me to quit the blog. It may be hard to believe that such a small amount of writing could take up so much time. People are spoiled. It takes a lot of effort to put out something everyday. Especially if you've got other things to do. My plate is pretty full.
I'll keep going, but the going is getting tougher.
Fact checking the fact checkers
Memeorandum has a number of stories about truth telling amongst the GOP candidates. That's really amusing. For all these years, I ( and others ) have noted the media's own problems with truth telling. For these guys to complain about anybody else is truly amazing.
Powerline catches Wapo's Kessler in a lie. The story is here. I guess most people's reaction is to do what I did. You don't bother reading the liars, but stick to the sources you trust.
I recall ( somewhat faintly ) the celebrations of 9.11. Those were overseas. I don't recall any here, though. However, I DON'T WATCH TV. This has been true for a long time. But there were other things that I DO recall. Now, the Powerline blog did find some stories of celebrations here in the US, in contradiction of what this so-called "fact-checker" said.
There's no respect for truth. Yet, these people want to be believed. A "fact checker" lying???? How does he keep his job????
I suppose that Trump is stirring up the memories of stuff these people would rather that everyone forget. There's no question that there are those who would rather forget that the 9.11 attack occurred at all. Why would they want to do this? For instance, there was a story about how 9.11 rememberences were being shut down on college campuses. Why flush 9.11 down the memory hole? Do they really want everyone to believe that Islam is about peace by blotting out any contradictory evidence? What does this have to do with the truth?
Even though Trump is a bit guilty himself ( according to Powerline ), he did point out something that people probably have forgotten ( or didn't think about). I find it unacceptable that ANY of them would celebrate the 9.11 attacks here in the US. It seems to me that the media is trying to tamp down any reaction to something as outrageous as that. That, in itself, is outrageous.
Thank God for blogs like Powerline. If the left had their way, NOBODY could report on these liars.
The real story is how the media doesn't report the truth. It isn't about how politicians are a bit loose with truth. Everybody should know that already, but I suppose that fact is being reported a little differently than what it should be as well.
Powerline catches Wapo's Kessler in a lie. The story is here. I guess most people's reaction is to do what I did. You don't bother reading the liars, but stick to the sources you trust.
I recall ( somewhat faintly ) the celebrations of 9.11. Those were overseas. I don't recall any here, though. However, I DON'T WATCH TV. This has been true for a long time. But there were other things that I DO recall. Now, the Powerline blog did find some stories of celebrations here in the US, in contradiction of what this so-called "fact-checker" said.
There's no respect for truth. Yet, these people want to be believed. A "fact checker" lying???? How does he keep his job????
I suppose that Trump is stirring up the memories of stuff these people would rather that everyone forget. There's no question that there are those who would rather forget that the 9.11 attack occurred at all. Why would they want to do this? For instance, there was a story about how 9.11 rememberences were being shut down on college campuses. Why flush 9.11 down the memory hole? Do they really want everyone to believe that Islam is about peace by blotting out any contradictory evidence? What does this have to do with the truth?
Even though Trump is a bit guilty himself ( according to Powerline ), he did point out something that people probably have forgotten ( or didn't think about). I find it unacceptable that ANY of them would celebrate the 9.11 attacks here in the US. It seems to me that the media is trying to tamp down any reaction to something as outrageous as that. That, in itself, is outrageous.
Thank God for blogs like Powerline. If the left had their way, NOBODY could report on these liars.
The real story is how the media doesn't report the truth. It isn't about how politicians are a bit loose with truth. Everybody should know that already, but I suppose that fact is being reported a little differently than what it should be as well.
Monday, November 23, 2015
Trump, Waterboarding and Whatnot
The use of waterboarding could be a good thing, but it can also be abused. Bush didn't abuse it, despite the caterwauling of the left, it was used quite sparingly.
Frankly, I wondered if the protest was legitimate. That is to say, the criticism of it wasn't based upon the reasons given, but some ulterior motive was at work. Since Hillary has Abedin close to her, and Obama has Valerie Jarret close to him, it may give a clue as to why the left wants the waterboarding to cease altogether. It's because these two are connected to Islamism and this is what is being protected. If there ever was a connection between Islamism and terrorism, it could expose these two to charges of treason. In other words, it protects the Democrats and the Islamists while putting them close to the top echelon of power in this country. That should be intolerable, and might be if it were reported. Of course, few people probably know about it, or if they do, they don't think about it much.
For Trump to advocate waterboarding is to lob a shell over their bows.
But Trump is also lobbing a shell over the bow of the GOP. No tricks he says, or he will run an independent campaign.
Trump isn't real kind to enemies. That's why people like him. But he may go a little too far. I'd be a little bit worried about him.
What Trump could do is to offer the VP slot to an Establishment Republican. But that's not how Trump operates. He has already said that he would consider Cruz. The Establishment hates Cruz probably as much as they hate Trump.
Trump needs to unite the party and that includes the Establishment wing. He won't do it the way he's going. That's something to worry about.
Frankly, I wondered if the protest was legitimate. That is to say, the criticism of it wasn't based upon the reasons given, but some ulterior motive was at work. Since Hillary has Abedin close to her, and Obama has Valerie Jarret close to him, it may give a clue as to why the left wants the waterboarding to cease altogether. It's because these two are connected to Islamism and this is what is being protected. If there ever was a connection between Islamism and terrorism, it could expose these two to charges of treason. In other words, it protects the Democrats and the Islamists while putting them close to the top echelon of power in this country. That should be intolerable, and might be if it were reported. Of course, few people probably know about it, or if they do, they don't think about it much.
For Trump to advocate waterboarding is to lob a shell over their bows.
But Trump is also lobbing a shell over the bow of the GOP. No tricks he says, or he will run an independent campaign.
Trump isn't real kind to enemies. That's why people like him. But he may go a little too far. I'd be a little bit worried about him.
What Trump could do is to offer the VP slot to an Establishment Republican. But that's not how Trump operates. He has already said that he would consider Cruz. The Establishment hates Cruz probably as much as they hate Trump.
Trump needs to unite the party and that includes the Establishment wing. He won't do it the way he's going. That's something to worry about.
Buchanan: "Let the Muslims take care of their own"
Quote:
I think the answer to that question is that the left is using these so-called refugees for political reasons. The left never does things for the reasons that they give. They do it in order to get an advantage. The so-called conservatives need to think and speak that way, in terms of principles, so that people can understand, and maybe they can have more staying power.
The principle is truth and integrity and that is an important part of Western Civilization. If you don't defend that, you just may lose it.
Buchanan makes a good point. But it can always be better.
Comment:“Why are we bringing Syrian refugees here when they’re already out of Syria? They’re not under any threat right now,” Buchanan told John Catsimatidis on “The Cats Roundtable” in an interview airing Sunday on New York’s AM-970.“I mean, once they leave Syria, if the Shia move into the southern section of Lebanon, the Sunnis move into other sections of Lebanon or Turkey or Jordan, they’re not in any mortal threat,” he added. ....the Sunni and Shia nations of the Arab world, since these are Arab, Sunni, and Shia?
I think the answer to that question is that the left is using these so-called refugees for political reasons. The left never does things for the reasons that they give. They do it in order to get an advantage. The so-called conservatives need to think and speak that way, in terms of principles, so that people can understand, and maybe they can have more staying power.
The principle is truth and integrity and that is an important part of Western Civilization. If you don't defend that, you just may lose it.
Buchanan makes a good point. But it can always be better.
Sunday, November 22, 2015
Traditional America is dying
This business with terrorism is probably going to rock the leftists on the heels for awhile, but they'll be back. Unless the so-called conservatives can land the knock out punch, that is.
What would be the knock out punch? Recall that George W. Bush had 90% approval for awhile. If he could have kept that large majority longer, it may have marginalized the left for a long, long time. A second example would be Reagan, who was successful enough to make the GOP a majority in Presidential politics. There was the Contract with America, which propelled Gingrich to the top for awhile. Each one of these lacked staying power, as the left regained its position, and even seemed stronger than ever when Obama was elected. None of those could deliver the knock out punch to the left, for one reason or another. Perhaps the knock out punch is staying power. Not one punch will do it, but a series of punches over a period of time.
If Trump is the new guy the so-called conservatives are going to pin their hopes on, they are going to be disappointed. The best outcome here may be a Trump loss and to get him from running on a 3rd party ticket. Trump doesn't have staying power, in my opinion. Besides, if he really is the guy, who can inherit his throne? Papa Bush couldn't do it. Shrub couldn't pass the baton because he was out for the count himself. Gingrich couldn't keep it together long enough to even keep his Speakership.
Conservatism represents traditional America. But it is dying out because it cannot truly defeat its most mortal enemy- the left. Without a champion, the conservatives cannot protect Traditional America, so it most likely will die.
What would be the knock out punch? Recall that George W. Bush had 90% approval for awhile. If he could have kept that large majority longer, it may have marginalized the left for a long, long time. A second example would be Reagan, who was successful enough to make the GOP a majority in Presidential politics. There was the Contract with America, which propelled Gingrich to the top for awhile. Each one of these lacked staying power, as the left regained its position, and even seemed stronger than ever when Obama was elected. None of those could deliver the knock out punch to the left, for one reason or another. Perhaps the knock out punch is staying power. Not one punch will do it, but a series of punches over a period of time.
If Trump is the new guy the so-called conservatives are going to pin their hopes on, they are going to be disappointed. The best outcome here may be a Trump loss and to get him from running on a 3rd party ticket. Trump doesn't have staying power, in my opinion. Besides, if he really is the guy, who can inherit his throne? Papa Bush couldn't do it. Shrub couldn't pass the baton because he was out for the count himself. Gingrich couldn't keep it together long enough to even keep his Speakership.
Conservatism represents traditional America. But it is dying out because it cannot truly defeat its most mortal enemy- the left. Without a champion, the conservatives cannot protect Traditional America, so it most likely will die.
Oil Companies Brace For Big Wave Of Debt Defaults
Quote:
comment:
Predictable. But I repeat myself. Clean coal tech will do the trick, but policy makers and politicians ever figure it out, or figure it out in time?
"Low oil prices are leaving many oil and gas companies with difficult debt loads, causing them to default at an extraordinary rate. On top of that, rating firm Moody's forecasts the default rate will increase. The strain on the oil patch comes after years of borrowing heavily at the start of the domestic energy renaissance." [emphasis added]
comment:
Predictable. But I repeat myself. Clean coal tech will do the trick, but policy makers and politicians ever figure it out, or figure it out in time?
Horseman of the Apocalypse saddling up?
The coming economic crisis
summary:
The Federal Reserve Bank has been blowing bubbles and the bubbles will burst eventually. The economy is already in recession, and the Fed will have to go to negative interest rates in order to keep things going. Yet, there is talk of raising interest rates. The Fed has no real power anymore to control the economy- it has failed. It could be the end of the line for the Fed.
summary:
The Federal Reserve Bank has been blowing bubbles and the bubbles will burst eventually. The economy is already in recession, and the Fed will have to go to negative interest rates in order to keep things going. Yet, there is talk of raising interest rates. The Fed has no real power anymore to control the economy- it has failed. It could be the end of the line for the Fed.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)