The link goes to an AP piece about the new UN study on global warming, which quotes John Kerry saying "the costs of inaction are catastrophic" and one of the study's authors saying "If we don't reduce greenhouse gases soon, risks will get out of hand... the risks have already risen," and another study author saying "We're all sitting ducks," though ducks, of all animals, do well in floods, like the one depicted in the box-office smash "Noah," whence Drudge nicked the photo to illustrate his scare paraphrase — his scare-a-phrase — of the UN's warning.
There's something else Drudge is doing here, because here are the headlines he puts above the photo, and they do not relate to global warming but to immigration:
Internal 'Homeland' Document Revealed...The links go to the government document and to a Breitbart and a Daily Caller article about it. The picture of the rampaging horde takes on different meaning, and the UN's warning is repurposed. Or maybe it is thematically connected as we are supposed to picture refugees from horrendously overheated places to our south frenzied in desperation, clamoring for access to our ark.
ICE released 68,000 convicted criminal aliens last year...
872,504 ordered removed by immigration authorities have not left...
Maybe it's funny, maybe it's scary, and maybe it's some offensive xenophobia.
Posts
89 comments:
... and maybe it's some offensive xenophobia.
Nope.
The reality is that in the last two periods of global warming, e.g The Roman Warm Period and the Medieval Warm Period, life was good :)
Given a choice between the proven impacts on all life forces of global cooling and the impacts of higher CO2 and sun on plant life, my money is man can adapt better to warm temps that mile thick glaciers.
And maybe Drudge is just putting the overwrought hype about nearly everything these days into the same basket?
I accept the premise that global warming is probably occurring and spurred on by CO2 emissions. But as a rational actor, I know that we are not going to do anything (effective) about it and that my family members are more at risk in the long term from: (i) anti-biotic resistant bacteria; or (ii) a potential carrington event (natural or man made). I would like us to focus resources on these two issues rather than global warming. Even if we shut down the U.S. economy, we are not going to stop global warming.
It'd be better with zombies.
That picture is from the new Russel Crowe movie, Noah, right? The first picture I saw from that had him appearing to wear sunglasses.
Oh gosh, I hope it isn't something offensive. As if the totality of our public life isn't defined by that. We'd better make sure we're not offensive in the unacceptable way.
Virgil Hilts said...
"I accept the premise that global warming is probably occurring and spurred on by CO2 emissions.."
"..spurred on..." is far too generous a description for how much CO2 powers AGW to the extent AGW is "real" (the assertion that it is man made activity that is the key driver for any potential warming).
Virgil: "...we are not going to stop global warming."
Well, since global warming has "stopped itself" for the last 17 years (explained away now by "magic" heat sink holes in the ocean, or was that yesterday's reason?) the left can already claim victory!
Just by talking about it!
The illegals aliens are not motivated to immigrate due to global cooling/warming/change. In fact, they await the day when they can return to their Laissez-faire lifestyles lived in warmer climates. Well, other than California, and similar, which offer different incentives.
As with other prominent phobias, this one has also been misdiagnosed. There is no fear. There is no dread. There is displacement and misdirection. Mexico et al have a problem which they need to address. It's odd that neither the "asylum" seekers nor their advocates are willing to discuss the circumstances of mass emigration.
Let me take another stab at that. Offensiveness is endemic in our culture. But some has an quasi-official* stamp of approval and some of it is just freedom. The people who make noise about things that are "offensive" are the same people or descend from the same people who deliberately offended cultural sensibilities a generation ago. "C'mon," they said, "we're trying to make you think about something differently, to open your mind." They destroy societal understandings for the sake of principal and then they erect their own idols that must be honored. It seems almost a matter of principle that their idols should be disrespected, not because any particular one is wrong, but because they are the result of a fundamental dishonesty.
What does Mr. Kerry propose that China do?
Ann wrote . . . maybe it's some offensive xenophobia.
xen·o·pho·bi·a
noun: xenophobia
1. intense or irrational dislike or fear of people from other countries.
soph·ist·ry
noun: sophistry
1. the use of fallacious arguments, esp. with the intention of deceiving.
I call out sophistry on your inappropriate use of the word xenophobia
Is this the one where Russell Crowe says "Are you not entertained?" Oh, wait....that's Gladiator....
They're pulling no punches here folks:
Virginia Burkett of the U.S. Geological Survey ... calls global warming "maybe one of the greatest known risks we face."
I know she is trying not to sound alarmist, and I know my house is 2870 feet above sea level, but I'm heading to Home Depot for sandbags.
The links go to the government document and to a Breitbart and a Daily Caller article about it.
Journalism!
amusing
polar bears on ice cubes
...offensive xenophobia.
So there's such a thing as inoffensive xenophobia. (Not like racism then, in that racism is always bad, and you're either racist or you're not. Probably like racism, though, in that the label goes with the identity, not the behavior.)
But you can't be a "persuasive" or "non-persuasive" hysterical alarmist, though. "Non-persuasive" is inherent in the label. You'd think these people would've figured out by now that coming across as dishonest crazed zealots, and/or paid whores for various global shake-down organizations and vested interests, is not the way to make friends and influence people.
Here's a hint, o earth lovers: Lots of well-meaning people are already suspicious of your motivations and your honesty. That being so, pumping up the hysteria and inflammatory rhetoric is probably not your most prudent and persuasive course of action right now. You know how the Republican party in the U.S. is always being advised to ditch the holy rollers? Word to the wise...
Its a desperate situation, no doubt about. Worry and angst help. Politicians and scientific ignorance are your friends.
garage: "Journalism!"
It is journalism.
Both Breitbart and the Daily Caller either put the full ICE document right in the article or provide a link directly to the article.
It's understandable that an avid follower of Media Matters and other lefty sites would be confused by such original content being provided directly.
maybe it's some offensive xenophobia
Why is it whenever Americans want to protect their nation, country or culture it is xenophobia....but it is fine for everyone else in the world to protect theirs?
Neither funny nor scary, but snarky commentary -- what Drudge often uses these visuals for. The point of the article (and the point of the photo) is that the IPCC is pushing its 'the sky is falling' climate campaign, which in Drudge's view has about as much connection to reality as your typical disaster movie.
Drudge often uses images to effectively sear words into our brains. The image need not be related to the words.
Hey wait a second. I thought we took care of this global warming shit by electing Obama. No?
Forget it, Ann; it's Climate Change.
that picture looks like "Occupy - whatever..."
The CO2 Is Pollution Hoax is all a mass propaganda Big Lie bought and paid for by grants from the World Governance folks.
As usual their real goal turns out to be ridding the Earth of humans to protect nature from being used up. That amounts tos a return to pagan Gaia Worship as the only Established World Religion.
Immigration backlash is on the rise in Europe
Everywhere I look, the whole world round,
(talkin' 'bout mass immigration)
It's clear to me Xenophobes abound.
To the tune of "My Generation"
tradguy: "As usual their real goal turns out to be ridding the Earth of humans to protect nature from being used up."
Actually, their real goal is simply control over each and every aspect of your existence.
Of course, their model is socialism/fascism.
What else did you expect?
Of course, their model is socialism/fascism.
Well, which is it?
And...who is "they?"
Of course, their model is socialism/fascism.
Well, which is it?
Both. fascism is a form of socialism.
And...who is "they?"
Your friends, the watermelons...you know..red on the inside and green on the outside?
If we don't do something a calamity will ensue?
Ok, how about nuclear power?
Well, we can't have that. Not in our neck of the woods.
The CO2 Is Pollution Hoax is all a mass propaganda Big Lie bought and paid for by grants from the World Governance folks.
And the 97% of scientist hoaxers would have gotten away with it if a band of plucky billionaire oil magnates didn't step up and uncover this mass fraud!
Curious George said...
Hey wait a second. I thought we took care of this global warming shit by electing Obama. No?
Since we didn't embrace Obamacare we caused Obama to fail. If only more Americans believed paying more for "insurance" that covers less is progress Climate Existence would be cured.
garage: "And the 97% of scientist hoaxers would have gotten away with it if a band of plucky billionaire oil magnates didn't step up and uncover this mass fraud!"
LOL
Poor garage is about 5 years behind on the talking points!
What do you expect from an uneducated pogue who probably flunked highschool woodshop in the 60's?
Please garage, do go on with your keen "science-y" insights.
In related news: CNN's news scrawls right now read "Fault could cause "Quake from Hell" in LA".
garage mahal wrote:
And the 97% of scientist hoaxers would have gotten away with it if a band of plucky billionaire oil magnates didn't step up and uncover this mass fraud!
We got that the oil companies have an agenda. But isn't it also true that those pushing the climate change argument also have an agenda?
Cook: "Well, which is it?"
LOL
Well, for those enterprises for which the left cannot simply take ownership, fascist control will do nicely.
Cookie: "And...who is "they?"
Gee, I don't know.
Maybe the ones advocating for ever greater and greater gov't control over enterprises when they aren't simply advocating for the nationalizing of industries.
Yeah, they are REALLY REALLY hard to identify.......
LOL
Of course, their model is socialism/fascism.
Well, which is it?
Wait until they find out the Russians liberated Auschwitz!
garage:
I don't believe the CO2-global warming connection is a hoax. I do believe it is severely overstated. The theory relies on feedbacks, and the strongest feedback effects are confirmation bias and Texas Sharpshooter's Fallacy.
By which I mean, it's a little heard to sift out the good science (yes, there is some) from the pointing at every odd weather event and yelling, "You see?! What more proof do you need?"
That 97% statistic is really shaky and misleading. You might consider asking yourself precisely what those 97% agree with, and 97% of precisely whom. But that would take the fun out of it, wouldn't it?
Its not 97%. Thats been debunked. It was 75 of 3146 (those that responded) to the poll.
So its 2% not 97%.
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2012/07/18/what-else-did-the-97-of-scientists-say/
Gahrie: Why is it whenever Americans want to protect their nation, country or culture it is xenophobia....but it is fine for everyone else in the world to protect theirs?
Not so, Gahrie. Europeans are also screeched at constantly by their betters about their deplorable xenophobia.
East Asians, on the other hand, are often described as "xenophobes", but the professional offense-takers of the world aren't (yet) much worked up about it - aside from the occasional hand-wringing from the WSJ or The Economist about how Japan is going to evaporate by tomorrow noon at the latest if they don't let half of Nigeria move in.
But yeah, aside from that, it is fine for everyone else in the world to want to protect their cultures. Understandably, no? They're awesome, and Western and EA countries totally suck, right?
garage: "Wait until they find out the Russians liberated Auschwitz!"
LOL
Anyone who thinks the Soviets "liberated" anything is pretty much an idiot.
Yeah.
All of eastern Europe was "liberated" by the Soviets.
BTW garage, does the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact ring a bell?
Socialists fight communists all the time.
Does the group "Mensheviks" ring a bell!
Oh my! Wait until Garage hears that the Communists fought the other communists!!
LOL
Anglelyne: "Europeans are also screeched at constantly by their betters about their deplorable xenophobia."
That is absolutely true and often times to a degree that mirrors most Euro-union hectoring to Americans.
Hey, if we start calling illegals "Gaijin", do you think the left would notice?
I would love to see what history comic books Drago reads.
garage: "I would love to see what history comic books Drago reads."
LOL
This is the comment that garage offers up after a reference to the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact as well as my allusion to the Meshevik/Bolshevik death match.
Even when you think it's not possible, garage digs his stupidity (or is it "happy ignorance?") hole even deeper.
I'm amused that Drudge uses the same image from the film that is found at Box Office Mojo.
http://boxofficemojo.com
Mojo is a site dedicated to tracking the current and historical box office performance of films. It's a great site! Comes in handy for the trivia night I write questions for.
Niall Ferguson says Stalin trusted only one person in his life.
Unfortunately, that one person was Adolf Hitler.
Anyone who thinks the Soviets "liberated" anything is pretty much an idiot.
So who liberated Auschwitz then?
We got that the oil companies have an agenda. But isn't it also true that those pushing the climate change argument also have an agenda?
All that you have to look for to see this is AlGore, who went from maybe personal wealth of $2 million to maybe $200 million today, much of it based on global warming hype (and, yes, selling his TV network to Al Jazeera ). More recently, we have seen billionaire Tom Steyer, who was tied to the article in the WaPo falsely claiming the Koch brothers were the biggest mineral leaseholders in the oil patch in Canada. Steyer apparently made hundreds of millions with Obama Administration "green energy" crony capitalism, and stands to make even more if the Keystone pipeline is killed. (see The Washington Post Responds To Me, and I Reply to the Post).
The reason that xenophobia has survived among humans for so long is that it is a survival trait. Humans are the most dangerous species on the planet. That fellow from over the hill or across the water may be coming to kill you, take your stuff, rape your women and enslave your children. Or he may be coming in peace, but bringing awful diseases with him to which you have no immunity.
Just as species like the flightless moa, etc., with no innate fear of humans were destroyed easily by human predation, so too a human population with no innate fear of unknown humans would be as well.
Garage:"Wait until they find out the Russians liberated Auschwitz!"
Does this finally demonstrate your admiration for the soviet and your hope that we continue to emulate their economic model? What has the liberation of Auschwitz got to do with either global warming, socialism or your obtuse approach to life in general?
The Nazis were always upfront about being Socialist. "Strength Through Joy" was about uniting urban and rural workers, it came up contantly in "Triumph" and fighting capitalism was a big part of their literature and propaganda.
Otto Scorzeny's auto-bio (where he constantly talks about socialimsm) mentions him talking to Mussolini after Gran Sasso about the enemy being "bolshevism without and capitalism within."
As for the U.N. and Kerry, neither of them has a thimble's worth of credibility as far as I am concerned. They and their pet "scientists" have lied to us so frequently and ubiquitously that I no longer believe anything they have to say. "The Boy Who Cried Wolf" writ large.
Of course, their model is socialism/fascism.
Well, which is it?
False dichotomy. You are implicitly asserting that there isn't overlap, when there most decidedly is. Best way to understand fascism as an economic model is to view it as crony capitalist socialism. The poor don't get an ownership interest in the means of production, but in the communist variant of socialism, their ownership interest was bogus anyway. Rather, it is the government controlling the means of production through sweetheart deals with large companies, that have to either do the government's bidding, or face ruin. So, we had the biggest companies doing just what the National Socialist German Workers' Party (Nationalsozialistische Deutsche Arbeiterpartei) wanted, and in trade, got special considerations, such as access to low cost, or no cost, labor (thanks to the number of concentration camps that had been set up).
While it is left wing accepted wisdom that fascists were right wing, that is really revisionism of the worst sort. Let me suggest "The Road to Serfdom" by Friedrich von Hayek, which is a contemporaneous account and criticism of the Nazi, Fascist, and Russian Communists.
What has the liberation of Auschwitz got to do with either global warming, socialism or your obtuse approach to life in general?
I didn't bring it up. Perhaps ask the dolt commenter that did?
garage: "So who liberated Auschwitz then?"
The fact that the Soviet army overran death camps in Eastern Europe on their way to Germany proper in the latter stages of WWII should not obscure the fact the Soviets themselves had invaded and enslaved the peoples of Poland in Sept of 39 (along with their nazi pals).
With the return of the soviets to Eastern Europe as Germany backpedaled some camps were overrun and prisoners released.
So yeah, you could argue they were "liberated" if you, as a lefty, are willing to ignore the enslavement of entire nations.
But you are a lefty.
And so were they.
So, in your book: "Soviets Cool!"
@Virgil Hilts said...
I accept the premise that global warming is probably occurring and spurred on by CO2 emissions
Empirical evidence does not exist to correlate atmospheric warming to increasing CO2. Warming more closely follows sun spot activity. I know, that greenhouse gas theory is so believable but the geological and atmospheric processes employed by Mother Earth are far more complex than a greenhouse.
Matt Ridley's piece in the WSJ is worth a read.
The subject of socialism/communism/nazism came up organically as an outgrowth regarding the subject of "hey, who exactly is pushing this global warming stuff" as a religion.
It was pointed out that the same folks who advocate for greater and greater control by governments over individuals are the ones doing it.
Those folks fall under the usual suspect categories: leftists/socialists/fascists/communists etc.
Just look at how many western "environmental groups" asked Hero Gorbachev to join them.
Well, garage, being the ignorant backwoods type that he is, decided that it was simply impossible for fascists and socialists to be in any way conflated in terms of ideology.
His "clever" demonstration of this incorrect presumption was "Wait until they find out the Russians liberated Auschwitz!" as if nazi's fighting commies made it impossible to say that the ideologies were in any regard similar.
Cookie popped up with his own false choice question.
After being hit with a couple examples of nazi/soviet love, garage fell back to his standard know-nothing over the shoulder retorts amounting to just what you'd expect.
Bottom line and the original point, all the same folks who are dedicated to increasing the power of the state over the individual are the same folks pushing AGW so diligently and religiously.
It's very straightforward.
gadfly: "Empirical evidence does not exist to correlate atmospheric warming to increasing CO2."
This is why the East Anglia-CRU "lost" ALL the raw data that was then "massaged" into all the models to get the result they wanted and advocate for: increased gov't expenditures and increased gov't power.
It's very interesting that all that raw data was not "lost" until the lawsuits demanding release of the data were finally and irrevocably lost by the hoaxers.
It was then, that that data would have to be shared, (and after emails were obtained that showed the hoaxers were colluding to hide data), that the raw data was "lost".
Yes: "lost".
Gee, I guess it was just impossible to have that stuff backed up anywhere.
I mean, back up your data?
That's crazy talk.
If only they had "secret routers" which could have saved the data!
Alas, if only!
Speaking of "dolts" garage, did you ever look up the definition of "sycophant"?
It would behoove you to do so in order to avoid another ugly 'garage doesn't understand basic terms' scenario.
If it helps, they actually have online dictionaries that can assist with just that sort of research, and they don't require secret routers to access.
Thank goodness for that!
I'm with Bjorn Lomborg on this. I believe AGW is real and happening, however it's not the most pressing issue for humanity.
Such a conundrum. We are all going to die if we don't get this under control, but...
There are too many people as it is.
When the screamers start acting like its a problem, then I will start considering their side. First requirement, get sterilized. Stop flying. Get rid of your mansions.
Bishops hill blog out of UK is good. There is a lot the experts don't know.
Forbes has a counter article out on the IPCC report.
Seeing Red said...
Forbes has a counter article out on the IPCC report.
Seeing Red, don't you get it?
It's Forbes.
ARM will be along shortly to tell you why Forbes Articles don't count.
In fact, just reading it probably qualifies you as a H8ter!
Drudge is making the point that you can't trust the government. They do what they want, and tell you what they want to tell you to get you to do what they want.
All of the average global temperature anomalies reported since before 1900 were caused by NATURAL phenomena. The correlation is 95% and uses only two drivers. CO2 change is not one of them. Search AGW unveiled to see the simple analysis.
Maybee: "They do what they want, and tell you what they want to tell you to get you to do what they want."
Sadly, this is the reality of the majority of human existence up to today.
It's not difficult to imagine a scenario where this is the case again.
Our western experience has been the extraordinary exception.
Well, we see where that's headed.
Michael wrote -
"What has the liberation of Auschwitz got to do with either global warming, socialism or your obtuse approach to life in general?"
In response Garage wrote -
"I didn't bring it up. Perhaps ask the dolt commenter that did?"
But Garage, Michael DID bring it up with the dolt commenter that did.
(internet accessed via secret router)
What is the biggest fraud, that is the question. Is it 1) altering the past temperature records to create warming when there is cooling, or 2) crafting models that base prediction outcomes on a CO2 sensitivity that is three times the known sensitivity, or 3) claiming to be the only peer reviewed scientific authorities after eliminating publication of all counter science papers and peer reviewing themselves.
As Lindzen at MIT says, the worst part of the Hoax is the damage done to the reputation of actual science, which will take a century to be remedied.
All of the average global temperature anomalies reported since before 1900 were caused by NATURAL phenomena. The correlation is 95% and uses only two drivers.
The change is also very well correlated with population, with the number of internal combustion engines, wheat yield in the Americas and even with the number of pages in Journals published by the American Meteorological Society.
Climate change is real and spectacular. The consensus, however, has yet to demonstrate that the anthropogenic cause has a significant effect on anything other than a local or regional basis.
The system is chaotic, which calls into question the legitimacy of their short-term skill, let alone their long-term estimates. Perhaps they should focus on forecasting the weather, and leave risk management to the engineers and less qualified individuals including politicians, activists, and other special interests.
Oh BTW Garage.
I was rebooting my secret router when it occurred to me that some had been asking after you in yesterday's Kelly R. thread.
I assumed that you had been away on an extended vacation/whatever. So it didn't surprise me that you had given it a pass. But now that I see you're here today, I guess that you had somehow overlooked it.
That post's still above the jump to older Althouse posts in case you wanted to comment. Just thought that maybe you missed it. It seemed right up your alley.
Madisonman: "The change is also very well correlated with population, with the number of internal combustion engines, wheat yield in the Americas and even with the number of pages in Journals published by the American Meteorological Society."
Correlation is indeed not necessarily causation.
You neglected Althouse pageviews and Amazon portal purchases (not just the lookie-loos).
Or, is it that Althouse pageviews and portal purchases correlates very well for the absence of warming?
Could Amazon be the heat sink?
Sacrebleu!
Great comments, Clyde.
I assumed that you had been away on an extended vacation/whatever
I don't think I commented all weekend. Fishing + Badgers + friends visiting. What did I miss?
Garage,
As I wrote, the Kelly R. post is still there for you to read. Still above the jump about nine posts down.
I'd read it to you, but that's not how the internet works when accessed by secret routers.
As I wrote, the Kelly R. post is still there for you to read
I already read the WSJ piece.
Nothing to say eh Bitchtits?
Doesn't get your juices flowing the way American children being burned alive by their government does, tubby?
You are disgusting.
Reason Magazine pointed out today that the IPCC's prediction is actually that the cost of global warming will be trivial -- 2% of world income in 2100. Even under extremely conservative estimates for economic growth, constant-dollar per capita incomes in 2100 will be several times what they are now; even if they only make 98% of that they'll be far wealthier than we are. Another way of looking at it: if fighting global warming slows economic growth by two one-hundredths of one percent, we'd have been better off not doing it.
This is the issue I always have with the global warming lobby: "the earth is warming because of humans and this will cause problems" does not imply "... and there is a solution that isn't even worse than the problems thus caused".
How did all these climate scientists decide that CO2 was a greenhouse gas? They say it is a greenhouse gas and that it is increasing and thereby our global temperatures are increasing as well. Well, how do they know there is direct causation? Could it be merely correlation? Or do they have the cause and effect backward? What if the increasing global temperatures are releasing trapped gasses?
Also polar bears.
For those who think for themselves it is obvious that the Changing climate we have seen over the past 4 years correlates perfectly with a shift into serious global cooling which has always followed sunspot (solar flare) minimums.
The Jet Stream that brings freezing air descending from the Arctic is blocking the normal west to east storms. That in turn causes weeks of heat areas and droughts in the west/midwest while restraining normal tornado and hurricane creation.
That is very bad news. The experienced colder weather is a serious problem, while the hoax warming weather would have been a good thing.
traditionalguy:
That's why they reframed the crisis as climate "change". There is safety in ambiguity.
I am happy to see that so many here are aware of the fraudulent parts of AGW theory.
Offensive against what? Why against the set of values which we work night and day to impose on you of course.
You see, it is offensive to be against the flooding of the unskilled labor market with cheap labor, in fact it is racist to even point out that those harmed most by this policy as a group are poor blacks, because this poli
cy on untrammeled immigration has been decided by our betters and any questioning of it is "offensive."
Why is billionaire Zuckerberg for "immigration reform"? Not because he has transcended racism, but because he wants cheap labor for this empire.
It is offensive to point out that Mexican peasants have a much lower climate impact than those same peasants transported into a first world economy, even as members of the poorest classes here, because that is racist and offensive.
It is offensive to point out that the climatologist have a hard enough time figuring out what is really going on in the incredibly complex weather system of the planet, and trusting them to come up with their invariably left leaning "solutions" is, well, let us just say not borne out by history as a prudent path.
It is offensive to question how, once we have surrendered our freedom, we are ever going to get it back, or even to suggest that we should want our individual liberty back.
It is offensive to suggest that maybe traditional values of marriage and child bearing and working hard were responsible for bringing great prosperity to Americans and even dragged those who rejected such values along for the ride. At some level men enjoy taking care of women economically and being taken care of emotionally by women, and being responsible for their children. It has been bred into our genes the way retrieving is bred into the genes of a Labrador. But not 100% of men, you say. The system was not perfect so it must be destroyed. Well, the perfect is the enemy of the good.
I was poor in the seventies.I can say that were I to live the lifestyle I lived then now, I would be considered poverty stricken. Sleeping in an unheated upstairs bedroom in a house not that far from the northern border, chipping designs with my fingernail in the ice that formed on the inside of my bedroom window in winter. No microwave oven, PC, smartphone, a black and white TV that got one snowy channel. The backyard garden being a significant source of nutrition, not by choice. What kept it from being poverty was values, values that the left has worked relentlessly to destroy. I find that as offensive.
I find it offensive that my daughters have grown up into a world where marriage is considered a fool's game by boys among their cohort, who have been "liberated" by a one-size-fits-all "feminism" designed for women who were already born into a highly privileged class.
I fucking hate the word "offensive" and I fucking hate those people that have destroyed a way of life, instead of working to fix its flaws within the context of a system that fundamentally worked to bring even the poorest out of abject poverty to create a new society based on disproven economics and beliefs that 4-6 million years of human evolution can be ignored because they are inconvenient.
Fuck you and your "offensive"!
"So who liberated Auschwitz then?"
Who "liberated" the Katyn Forest?
The answer to both is totalitarian armies on their way to do something vastly more important to their interests.
Somewhat like the socialist/fascist activist legions of climate change are doing today.
Mad & Drac - But lack of correlation proves lack of causation. None of those things, or CO2, correlates with average global temperature.
None of the 70 or so GCMs produce output that correlates either.
Post a Comment