July 28, 2015

Their Backslidings Many; Why Donald Trump is ascending

Timothy Birdnow

With the recent discussions about Donald Trump, why he is successful, I offer two older essays I have written that largely explain his success.

First, there is this.http://tbirdnow.mee.nu/whatsoever_things_are_honest_rino_republicans_are_not

Whatsoever things are honest. The Bible makes that perfectly clear. Trump may be a bit of a screwball but he is an honest one, speaking his mind. He does not carefully follow a vetted and managed script. He does not speak with clipped, measured tones, the approved version of political discourse. He refuses to be bullied and is too rich to buy. As a result the man has an honesty that is as refreshing to the American People as a glass of ice water to a man lost in the Kalihari.

Second, I filed this complaint about Bobby Jindall, who advocated we steer clear of any personal criticisms of Barack Obama, maintaining a friendly face instead of showing righteous anger. http://canadafreepress.com/article/39263

And finally, I wrote this back in 2011. http://canadafreepress.com/article/42926

Here is it in it's entirety:


"Go up and down the streets of Jerusalem,
look around and consider,
search through her squares.

If you can find but one person
who deals honestly and seeks the truth,
I will forgive this city.

Jeremiah5:1

There is a shibboleth floating around in conservative circles these days, one that is seriously wrong-headed and yet, like a bad penny, it keeps turning up. That shibboleth is the "unrealistic” demand by the Tea Party on "perfection” and an unwillingness to accept any blemish in our candidates. This has become a very popular argument to make, yet it is a very dangerous one.

Rush Limbaugh made the following statements on his radio show, and it has been a theme of his for the last few months:

"The Constitution’s premise is that human beings with too much power will abuse it and imprison and tyrannize people. The whole point of it was based on the imperfection of people, and yet here we are apparently looking for the perfect—and I’m not running, so it’s not gonna be findable.”

"The Founders were not perfect. There is no human being who is perfect. There’s no perfect plan. Just like there’s no utopia. Yet these standards somehow end up being applied to us, our candidates, conservatives, where does this come from, where does this start?”

[...]

"Could the people ostensibly on our side of things start focusing on Obama rather than trying to find the perfect Republican conservative? I’m telling you: With his numbers eight points below Carter’s, with half the country afraid to spend money on Christmas presents, with people out of their homes, no jobs, would somebody please explain to me where it is automatic that the incumbent wins?”

{...}

"We got Newt’s problem here. You got a Romney problem over there. You got a Bachmann problem. Could we focus on Obama? Could the people ostensibly on our side of things start focusing on Obama rather than trying to find the perfect Republican conservative, ‘cause that person doesn’t exist.”

Now, I usually agree with Rush, and I understand where he is coming from in this instance as well, but I think he is missing a point here. Rush is trying to get us all united in the face of a common and terrible enemy, and he rightly understands that the media wants to divide the GOP, tear it into warring factions.

Which leads us to another conservative I greatly admire; in a recent post at Canada Freee Press the ever brilliant Lloyd Marcus had this to say;

"The criteria embraced by the liberal media, Democrats, and some conservatives for selecting the 2012 Republican presidential nominee are quite clear: imperfect conservatives need not apply. Conservative presidential candidates must have been born yesterday, not having lived long enough to break any of the Ten Commandments, make a mistake, or say or do anything stupid.

However, in their short time on the planet, our conservative candidate, along with possessing a "perfect past,” must display a masterful expertise of all topics foreign and domestic. Anything less means that our conservative guy or gal is an incompetent idiot.”

Now, it is indisputable that the media and liberal power brokers want to choose our candidate for us just as they did in 2008 (unleashing the hapless and toothless geriatric John McCain to storm Washington in his bedroom slippers). And we should not let ourselves be moved by the unfolding of nefarious plans to besmirch our people. That is absolutely a no-brainer. But I fear what is happening is that we are, in our desperation to unseat the current squatter in the Oval Office, willing to accept ANY candidate who has a "chance of winning”. Unfortunately, that phrase usually ends up meaning someone who will betray our cause.

What was the message of the midterm elections? That people are fed up with business as usual. There is a disgust on both sides of the great political divide with the professional politician, the leadership of the ruling class. Everyone instinctively knows that things have spiraled out of control, and while the Tea Party and the lice-infested hippies of the 99 Cents crowd aka Occupy fill-in-the-blank have radically different dreams and hopes for the future, they share one thing in common - a rebellion against the rule of the elites. People are tired of playing their parts meekly in the passion play that the wielders of power have pre-written for them. People of all stripes are tired of the games, tired of the wrangling for power for the sake of power, tired of the endless charade that is politics in America. There is a seriousness about reform - real reform, and the public wants new blood, leaders who are actually trying to implement their vision and not simply follow a "big tent” party platform designed to perpetuate political power.

Which is precisely what most of the GOP candidates do not have to offer. Mitt Romney is a warmed-over version of Gerald R. Ford with better hair. One expects to see him don a WIN button and fall off the debate stage.
Tea Party instinctively knows Romney will sell them down the river

Actually, the Tea Party instinctively knows Romney will sell them down the river. He created Romneycare in Massachusetts, and will be an unwilling participant in the dissolution of Obamacare. He was pro Cap and Trade, in favor of amnesty for illegal invaders, and has a host of other "moderate” positions that the elites in the GOP love and the liberals can tolerate.

And Romney is pretty much par for the course among GOP candidates. You have Gingrich with his couch-a-thon with Nancy Pelosi and his love affair with "Green Conservatism”, his sometimes flakey ideas and inability to stick to a plan (Tom Delay complained bitterly of Gingrich’s inability to drive an agenda, for example, and said that Gingrich could not stay on message). His recent comments on illegal aliens shows he is still in the amnesty camp. In short, Gingrich is an insider.

The same can be said for Rick Perry, who granted in-state tuition to illegal aliens, and who forced the Human Papilloma Virus vaccine on school children.

The list goes on and on. The problem, dear Brutus, is not in ourselves but in our stars. We desperately seek an honest candidate who will actually advance an agenda that we want. Michelle Bachman excepted, there are no good candidates in the current field. It was part of the appeal of Herman Cain; he has his faults but comes across as sincere. The endless attacks on Cain, the accusations of sexual misconduct, took their toll (and the others in the GOP did not back him up), but Cain was never rejected for where he stood. Michelle Bachman and Ron Paul have never really gotten going, but primarily for reasons of electability; Bachman is too green on the national stage (nobody wants a repeat of Barack Obama) and Ron Paul’s pacifism does not sit well with conservatives.

Barack Obama tapped into a fundamental desire in this country; people know instinctively that the system is broken, and are looking for a way out. Obama promised "change” without specifics, and people were desperate for some new leadership. Much like a used car salesman Obama waxed glowingly about his "new” agenda which turned out to be a dilapidated old wreck that had been detailed and waxed to look new. His idea of new was to bring back the 1970s. But his failure doesn’t mean the public isn’t searching for more. People want leadership - and not the same old politics. They want honest men in power. They want people unlike the current crop who hang around year after year like toenail fungus, feeding off the droppings of the ruling class. This explains the popularity of Herman Cain; Cain is clearly not a polished insider politician. His numbers remained strong during the whole "sex misconduct” scandal precisely because of his inept response. He is GENUINE. A career guy would have had a team of lawyers on top of this immediately, with slick sound bytes and canned responses. Cain appears to be an honest man; his inept handling of this bespeaks someone who was completely blindsided. That is what America wants; a guy who reacts rather than plots. The nation is crying for an honest man.

Bear in mind, this did not start with the election of Obama. It started after the Presidency of Ronald Reagan where the GOP fell behind Reagan’s veep George Herbert Walker Bush. Bush was the consummate insider, the man the GOP establishment wanted in 1980. He governed like a RINO, with his "kinder, gentler nation” rhetoric and his foolish tax increase. Conservatives held their noses and voted for him, and it started the long slide into perdition. Bush gave us Clinton, which gave us a fresh start with the GOP taking Congress, but they no sooner had the "Republican Revolution” than they began compromising. It was a long, agonizing era; the ‘90s, where the GOP establishment allowed the Democrats to whittle away at their power through accommodation. Forgotten is the impeachment of Bill Clinton, where the GOP controlled Senate, terrified by Clinton’s popularity, refused to conduct a real trial. (I remember the end of the trial where Chief Justice Rehnquist was thanked by Trent Lott; Rehnquist had a look of total disgust on his face, disgust born of presiding over what was obviously a sham.) They also feared an incumbent Al Gore, which was foolish, considering Gore would have taken much of the blame for the Clinton Administration (what was he going to do? He would have pardoned Clinton as surely as Ford pardoned Nixon, and paid the same price). So Lott and the other cowardly establishment types designed the trial so as to end swiftly with an acquittal. Testimony was limited, witnesses were limited, the scope of options limited BY THE GOP SENATE. In the end, President Clinton lied under oath to a federal judge (and had his law license revoked for it by said judge), lied to Congress, obstructed justice, and got away with it because the GOP was frightened.

The conservatives watched as the Democrats leeched power from the GOP in the Senate, as the GOP supported RINOs and eventually offered a "power sharing” arrangement - an arrangement that they had no reason to offer as they still held a plurality. We watched as the GOP played a "duck and cover” strategy that cost them seats in the off-year election of 1998, a strategy that any fool should have understood wouldn’t work but which Newt Gingrich confidently championed. We watched as the Republicans who had taken power in ‘94 broke their promises, promises of term limits, of control of spending, of standing on principle. As a result, they lost the Senate and the House margins shrunk. The Republicans appeared little different from the Democrats.

That was in the 1990’s; the 2000’s were even worse, as the GOP would not buck its titular leader who would have been happier had he been a Democrat just prior to McGovern. George W. Bush gave us No Child Left Behind, gave us the prescription drug entitlement, gave us the ethanol mandate for our gasoline, windmills, the mandated end to the incandescent light bulb. He tried to give us the largest amnesty for illegal aliens in history. He spent money, money, money! And his parting gift was the enormous bank bailout "we have to suspend free-market capitalism in order to save free-market capitalism”. And all through the Bush years we were treated to a political strategy where we endlessly gave half a loaf to those who sought to remake America.

George W. Bush was the ultimate insider. He was supported from the beginning because the alternative was worse, and he could win. Political compromise has destroyed the United States of America.
Compromise so touted by people like Colin Powell and other elitists inside the GOP has been killing us

Consider the compromise deals by House Speaker John Boehner; they end up being surrenders to the status quo, at best. Despite the rise of the Tea Party we cannot even get Congress to cut spending back to 2008 levels; that is considered somehow radical. Meanwhile the nation moves ever to the Left with each compromise - the Marxist dialectic in action. We want it to stop, not just slow down. We cannot even get those in our own party to do that.

And so we are no longer willing to settle for a mere half loaf. We want our public servants to be just that; servants who obey us, not masters who serve themselves and demand our obedience. This notion we are somehow too demanding to expect an honest servant, one who holds our values dear, is wrong, and a large part of why we have seen the terrible erosion of America over the last few decades. We are compromising ourselves to death.

According to Jeremiah5:5

So I will go to the leaders
and speak to them;
surely they know the way of the Lord,
the requirements of their God.”

But with one accord they too had broken off the yoke
and torn off the bonds.

Therefore a lion from the forest will attack them,
a wolf from the desert will ravage them,
a leopard will lie in wait near their towns
to tear to pieces any who venture out,
for their rebellion is great
and their backslidings many.

Yahweh promised to save Jerusalem for the sake of one upright man. Surely somewhere in America one such man can be found.

Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at 07:16 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 2437 words, total size 15 kb.

Angelo Codeville on Trump

Jack Kemp and Wil Wirtanen both simultaneously forwards this:

http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2015/07/does-trump-trump-angelo-codevilla-on-our-present-moment.php

Posted on July 27, 2015 by Steven Hayward in 2016 presidential election, Donald Trump
Does Trump Trump? Angelo Codevilla on Our Present Moment
Angelo Codevilla is a former staff member of the Senate Intelligence Committee, professor emeritus of international relations at Boston University, and the author of more than a dozen fine books on politics, arms control, and intelligence (if I had to pick a favorite it might be The Character of Nations), including a fine translation of Machiavelli’s Prince published by Yale University Press. Most recently his essay-turned-book The Ruling Class: How They Corrupted America and What We Can Do About It caught the attention of Rush Limbaugh and many others. It argues that our fundamental political problem is not "big government,” but the creation of a ruling class, inhabiting both parties, that is steadily increasing its authoritarian control over the nation. In a conversation a few months ago Angelo remarked, "The 2016 election is simple; the person who runs on the platform ‘Who do they think they are?’ will win.”
It occurred to me that Trump is coming closest to this disposition, flaws and all, which explains why he has taken off. I asked Angelo for his thoughts, and he sends along the following, which ratifies the view that several of Trumps supposed "mistakes” are anything but, though you’ll see at the end Angelo’s final judgment:

Does Trump trump?
By Angelo M. Codevilla

"In the land of the blind,” so goes the saying, "the one-eyed man is king.” Donald Trump leapt atop other contenders for the Republican presidential nomination when he acted on the primordial fact in American public life today, from which most of the others hide their eyes, namely: most Americans distrust, fear, are sick and tired of, the elected, appointed, and bureaucratic officials who rule over us, as well as their cronies in the corporate, media, and academic world. Trump’s attraction lies less in his words’ grace or even precision than in the extent to which Americans are searching for someone, anyone, to lead against this ruling class, that is making America less prosperous, less free, and more dangerous.

Trump’s rise reminds this class’s members that they sit atop a rumbling volcano of rejection. Republicans and Democrats hope to exorcise its explosion by telling the public that Trump’s remarks on immigration and on the character of fellow member John McCain (without bothering to try showing that he errs on substance), place him outside the boundaries of their polite society. Thus do they throw Br’er Rabbit into the proverbial briar patch. Now what? The continued rise in Trump’s poll numbers reminds all that Ross Perot – in an era that was far more tolerant of the Establishment than is ours – outdistanced both Bush 41 and Bill Clinton before self-destructing, just by speaking ill of both parties before he self destructed.

Republicans brahmins have the greater reason to fear. Whereas some three fifths of Democratic voters approve the conduct of their officials, only about one fifth of Republican voters approve what theirs do. If Americans in general are primed for revolt, Republican (and independent) voters fairly thirst for it.

Trump’s barest hints about what he opposes (never mind proposes) regarding just a few items on the public agenda have had such effect because they accord with what the public has already concluded about them. For example,Trump remarked, off the cuff, that "Mexico does not send us its best.” The public had long since decided that our ruling class’s handling of immigration (not just from Mexico) has done us harm. The ruling class – officials, corporations, etc.- booed with generalities but did not try to argue that they had improved America by their handling of immigration. The more they would argue that, the more they would lose. At least if someone more able than Trump were leading against them.

Our ruling class was sure that Trump had discredited himself by saying that John McCain, whom they treat as an icon, is not an optimal personification of heroism regardless of what suffering he endured in captivity. But they were mistaken. Because Americans are sick of celebrating victims of defeats, and naturally eager to enjoy the kind of peace that only victories can bring, Trump’s expressed preference for heroes who "don’t get captured” resonated. Trump may or may not know any of the unsavory details about McCain’s actions as a POW and, as a public official, in regard to POWs and MIAs. But it does not take much research to find out why nobody will defend him other than by trying to prevent discussion those details. Surely Republican "architect” Karl Rove, who organized South Carolina’s military vote against McCain in the 2000 primary, knows them. The families of Vietnam POWs-MIAs pour onto anyone who will listen to their bitterness at McCain’s role in denying the existence of abandoned POWs and sealing information about them. The general public can get a glimpse such things by Googling the armed forces’ newspaper Stars and Stripes, Friday June 6, 1969, or the work of Pulitzer Prize NYT reporter Sydney Schanberg.

Moreover, Americans are becoming increasingly skeptical about their celebrities’ integrity. With good reason.

McCain is just a minor example of a phenomenon that characterizes our ruling class: reputations built on lies and cover-ups, lives of myth protected by mutual forbearance, by complicitous journalists, or by records deep-sixed, including in in government archives. Ever wonder, for example, why the establishment of Martin Luther King as a national icon superior to George Washington, as the only American with his own national holiday, was accompanied by sealing government records about him for seventy five years? Because those records reflect well on him and his partisans? Sure. Countless other figures – need one mention Barack Obama? – live by images sustained by denigrating questions about their factual bases while restricting access to those bases. As they lord it over us, they live lives that cannot stand scrutiny.

The point here is simple: our ruling class has succeeded in ruling not by reason or persuasion, never mind integrity, but by occupying society’s commanding heights, by imposing itself and its ever-changing appetites on the rest of us. It has coopted or intimidated potential opponents by denying the legitimacy of opposition. Donald Trump, haplessness and clownishness notwithstanding, has shown how easily this regime may be threatened just by refusing to be intimidated.

Having failed to destroy Trump, Republicans and Democrats are left to hope that he will self-destruct as Perot did. Indeed, Trump has hardly scratched the surface and may not be able to do more than that. Yet our rulers know the list of things divide them from the American people is long. They want to avoid like the plague any and all arguments on the substance of those things. They fear the rise of an un-intimidated leader more graceful and precise than Trump, someone whose vision is fuller but who is even more passionate in championing the many resentments the voicing of just a few channeled so much support to Trump.

Here are some examples: Justice Kennedy’s majority opinions in Windsor and Obergefell preemptively accused anyone who opposed redefining marriage to include homosexuals of being "offensive,” "hateful.” Refusal to honor homosexual unions, he wrote, is not "explicable by anything except animus.” What if a statesman, speaking for the American people, were to ask what, precisely, is so honorable about anal intercourse that those who refuse to honor it should be so stigmatized? Before 1961, all 50 states criminalized anal intercourse, heterosexual as well as homosexual. Why precisely were they wrong in doing so? By what right does anyone place such questions "out of bounds”?

After a video showing officials of federally-funded Planned Parenthood taking orders for body parts of babies to be custom-slaughtered for that purpose, House Speaker John Boehner deflected demands for legislation to stop this by saying he needed more information. An unintimidated statesman might ask: Do you not know that each of these little ones’ DNA shows him or her to be an individual son or daughter of an individual mother and father? Like Lincoln, he would argue that no one has the right to exclude any other human from the human race and demand that Boehner answer why he continues to sanction so to dispose of millions of little sons and daughters?

Republicans and Democrats profit personally and through their corporate cronies by a welter of legislation and regulation by which they command what we must eat, how to shower, what medical care is proper and what is not: mandating that a third of the U.S. corn crop be turned into ethanol, restricting the use of coal, how we may use our land, etc. They justify these predatory intrusions into our lives by claiming that peculiar knowledge of science unavailable to others. They refuse to justify their scientific conclusions with the likes of us. An un-intimidated statesman, reiterating that science is reason, public reason, not pretense, would throw the notion that "science R us” back into their faces.

At increasing speed, our ruling class has created "protected classes” of Americans defined by race, sex, age, disability, origin, religion, and now homosexuality, whose members have privileges that outsider do not. By so doing, they have shattered the principle of equality – the bedrock of the rule of law. Ruling class insiders use these officious classifications to harass their socio-political opponents. An unintimidated statesman would ask: Why should not all "classes” be equally protected? Does the rule of law even admit of "classes”? Does not the 14th amendment promise "the equal protection of the laws” to all alike? He would note that when the government sets aside written law in favor of what the powerful want, it thereby absolves citizens any obligation to obey government.

Habitually, our ruling class tries to intimidate its opponents by calling them "haters” ("racists,” etc. is part of the all too familiar litany.) A statesman worthy of the title would respond that calling people such names is the very opposite of civility, never mind love. Such a leader would trump our rulers.

Donald Trump is not such a person.

Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at 06:28 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 1702 words, total size 11 kb.

Unknown Climate Feedbacks; Life Increases Planetary Albedo

Dana Mathewson

Do you want to bet none of this is found in the famous computer models?

http://www.foxnews.com/science/2015/07/27/sea-creatures-make-brighter-clouds-to-cool-earth/

Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at 06:27 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 25 words, total size 1 kb.

Bitter Clingers

Dana Mathewson

W.. Wait! Zero told me gun violence is strictly an American phenomenon!

http://www.foxnews.com/world/2015/07/27/gunfight-at-afghanistan-wedding-kills-21-wounds-10-official-says/

Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at 06:26 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 17 words, total size 1 kb.

Muslim Women Assault French Sunbathers

Dana Mathewson


Lock the raghead gals up and melt the keys down! This is (or used to be) France!
http://www.foxnews.com/world/2015/07/27/sunbather-attacked-in-french-park-for-wearing-bikini/

Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at 06:25 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 25 words, total size 1 kb.

July 27, 2015

An Errant Evironmental Encyclical

Paul Driessen

Pope Francis’s Laudato Si encyclical is often eloquent, always passionate, but too often encumbered by platitudes and simply erroneous thinking. The pope believes climate change is largely manmade and driven by a capitalist economic system that exploits the poor. That’s why, he says, we must radically reform the global economy, promote sustainable development and wealth redistribution, and ensure "intergenerational solidarity” with the poor.

On all of this he certainly has a lot of new friends in the United Nations, Big Green and Climate Crisis, Inc. It is tremendously disappointing that he seems unable to think these issues through, open his mind to new ideas, speak with scholars outside his closed circle, and promote policies that will actually help the poor – instead of condemning them to continued poverty, disease, despair and early death.

My article this week shows where I believe Pope Francis went wrong – and why free market capitalism and hydrocarbon energy remain the best way forward.



An Errant Evironmental Encyclical

Pope Francis’ prescriptions will perpetuate poverty, disease, premature death in Third World

Paul Driessen

The  HYPERLINK "http://en.radiovaticana.va/news/2015/06/18/encyclical_laudato_si_on_the_care_of_our_common_home/1152327" Laudato Si encyclical on climate, sustainability and the environment prepared by and  HYPERLINK "http://dailycaller.com/2015/06/29/how-the-power-elite-prejudiced-the-popes-climate-change-encyclical/" for Pope Francis is often eloquent, always passionate but often encumbered by platitudes, many of them erroneous.
"Man has slapped nature in the face,” and "nature never forgives,” the pontiff declares. "Never have we so hurt and mistreated our common home as in the last 200 years.” It isn’t possible to sustain the present level of consumption in developed countries and wealthier sectors of society. "Each year thousands of species are being lost,” and "if we destroy creation, it will destroy us.”

The pope believes climate change is largely manmade and driven by a capitalist economic system that exploits the poor. Therefore, he says, we must radically reform the global economy, promote sustainable development and wealth redistribution, and ensure "intergenerational solidarity” with the poor, who must be given their "sacred rights” to labor, lodging and land (the Three L’s).

All of this suggests that, for the most part, Pope Francis probably welcomes statements by his new friends in the United Nations and its climate and sustainability alliance.

One top Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change official bluntly says climate policy is no longer about environmental protection; instead, the next climate summit will negotiate "the distribution of the world’s resources.” UN climate chief Christiana Figueres goes even further. UN bureaucrats, she says, are undertaking "probably the most difficult task we have ever given ourselves, which is to intentionally transform the global economic development model.” [emphasis added]

However, statements by other prominent prophets of planetary demise hopefully give the pope pause.
Obama science advisor John Holdren and Population Bomb author Paul Ehrlich, in their Human Ecology book: "We need to de-develop the United States” and other developed countries, "to bring our economic system into line with the realities of ecology and the global resource situation.” We will then address the "ecologically feasible development of the underdeveloped countries.” [emphasis added]

Ehrlich again: "Giving society cheap energy is like giving an idiot child a machine gun.” And most outrageous: The "instant death control” provided by DDT was "responsible for the drastic lowering of death rates” in poor countries; so they need to have a "death rate solution” imposed on them.

Radical environmentalism’s  HYPERLINK "http://townhall.com/columnists/pauldriessen/2015/03/21/radical-environmentalisms-death-campaigns-n1973889/page/full" death campaigns do not stop with opposing DDT even as a powerful insect repellant to prevent malaria. They view humans (other than themselves) as consumers, polluters and "a plague upon the Earth” – never as creators, innovators or protectors. They oppose modern fertilizers and biotech foods that feed more people from less land, using less water. And of course they are viscerally against all forms and uses of hydrocarbon energy, which yields far more energy per acre than alternatives.

Reflect on all of this a moment. Unelected, unaccountable UN bureaucrats have given themselves the authority to upend the world economic order and redistribute its wealth and resources – with no evidence that any alternative they might have in mind will bring anything but worse poverty, inequality and death.

Moreover, beyond the dishonest, arrogant and callous attitudes reflected in these outrageous statements, there are countless basic realities that the encyclical and alarmist allies sweep under the rug.

We are trying today to feed, clothe, and provide electricity, jobs, homes, and better health and living standards to six billion more people than lived on our planet 200 years ago. Back then, reliance on human and animal muscle, wood and dung fires, windmills and water wheels, and primitive, backbreaking, dawn-to-dusk farming methods made life nasty, brutish and short for the vast majority of humans.

As a  HYPERLINK "https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jbkSRLYSojo" fascinating short video by Swedish physician and statistician Hans Rosling illustrates, human life expectancy and societal wealth has surged dramatically over these past 200 years. None of this would have been possible without the capitalism, scientific method and hydrocarbon energy that radical, shortsighted activists in the UN, EPA, Big Green, Inc. and Vatican now want to put in history’s dustbin.

Over the past three decades, fossil fuels – mostly coal – helped 1.3 billion people get electricity and escape debilitating, often lethal energy and economic poverty. However, 1.3 billion still do not have electricity. In India alone, more people than live in the USA still lack electricity; in Sub-Saharan Africa, 730 million (equal to Europe) still cook and heat with wood, charcoal and animal dung.

Hundreds of millions get horribly sick and  HYPERLINK "http://www.who.int/mediacentre/factsheets/fs292/en/" 4-6 million die every year from lung and intestinal diseases, due to breathing smoke from open fires and not having clean water, refrigeration and unspoiled food.

Providing energy, food, homes and the Three L’s to middle class and impoverished families cannot happen without nuclear and hydrocarbon energy and numerous raw materials. Thankfully, we still have these resources in abundance, because "our ultimate resource” (our creative intellect) has enabled us to use "fracking” and other technologies to put Earth’s resources to productive use serving humanity.

Little solar panels on huts, subsistence and organic farming, and  HYPERLINK "https://www.masterresource.org/cuisinarts-of-the-air/wind-power-bats-double-standard/" bird-and-bat-butchering wind turbines have serious cost, reliability and  HYPERLINK "http://carbon-sense.com/2011/09/04/wind-least-sustainable/" sustainability problems of their own. If Pope Francis truly wants to help the poor, he cannot rely on these "alternatives” or on UN and Big Green ruling elite wannabes. Who are they to decide what is "ecologically feasible,” what living standards people will be "permitted” to enjoy, or how the world should "more fairly” share greater scarcity, poverty and energy deprivation?

We are all obligated to help protect our planet and its people – from real problems, not imaginary ones. Outside the computer modelers’ windows, in The Real World, we are not running out of energy and raw materials. (We’re just not allowed to develop and use them.) The only species going extinct have been birds on islands where humans introduced new predators – and raptors that have been wiped out by giant wind turbines across habitats in California and other locations. Nor are we encountering climate chaos.

No category 3-5 hurricane has struck the USA in a record 9-3/4 years. (Is that blessing due to CO2 and capitalism?) There has been no warming in 19 years, because the sun has gone quiet again. We have not been battered by droughts more frequent or extreme than what humanity experienced many times over the millennia, including those that afflicted biblical Egypt, the Mayas and Anasazi, and Dust Bowl America.
The scientific method brought centuries of planetary and human progress. It requires that we propose and test hypotheses that explain how nature works. If experimental evidence supports a hypothesis, we have a new rule that can guide further health and scientific advances. If the evidence contradicts the hypothesis, we must devise a new premise – or give up on further progress.

But with climate change, a politicized method has gained supremacy. Based on ideology, it ignores real-world evidence and fiercely defends its assumptions and proclamations. Laudato Si places the Catholic Church at risk of surrendering its role as a champion of science and human progress, and returning to the ignominious persecution of Galileo.

Nor does resort to sustainable development provide guidance. Sustainability is largely interchangeable with "dangerous manmade climate change” as a rallying cry for anti-hydrocarbon, wealth redistribution and economic transformation policies. It  HYPERLINK "https://www.heartland.org/sites/default/files/06-18-14_driessen_sustainability.pdf" means whatever particular interests want it to mean and has become yet one more  HYPERLINK "http://www.nas.org/images/documents/Twelve-page_version_of_the_sustainability_report.pdf" intolerant ideology in college and government circles.

Climate change and sustainability are critical moral issues. Denying people access to abundant, reliable, affordable hydrocarbon energy is not just wrong. It is immoral – and lethal.
It is an unconscionable crime against humanity to implement policies that pretend to protect the world’s energy-deprived masses from hypothetical manmade climate and other dangers decades from now – by perpetuating poverty, malnutrition and disease that kill millions of them tomorrow.

Paul Driessen is senior policy analyst for the Committee For A Constructive Tomorrow, author of  HYPERLINK "http://www.amazon.com/Eco-Imperialism-Green-Power-Black-Death/dp/0939571234/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1433540490&sr=1-1&keywords=paul+driessen+%2B+eco+imperialism&pebp=1433540499327&perid=01JDAJ8XPWAV9VND8SDE" Eco-Imperialism: Green power - Black death, and coauthor of HYPERLINK "http://www.amazon.com/Cracking-Big-Green-Save-Earth-ebook/dp/B00O4F3F22"Cracking Big Green: Saving the world from the Save-the-Earth money machine.


Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at 07:59 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 1522 words, total size 12 kb.

NY Post Calls Hillary Snidely Whiplash!





Jack Kemp

Yes, it's true - and in an article by featured columnist Michael Goodwin, no less.

Here are a few lines from the article:

http://nypost.com/2015/07/26/hillary-has-a-dangerous-enemy-in-the-obama-administration/

If Hillary Clinton were a cartoon character, she’d be Snidely Whiplash, forever muttering to herself, "Curses, foiled again.” And she’d be right.

The lady in waiting will have to keep waiting. Probably forever. Fate has spoken.

Already threatened by a growing trust deficit with voters, her would-be majesty now faces an even more lethal adversary. It’s called the truth, though she probably sees it as a vast, left-wing conspiracy....

Clinton has an enemies list — and it looks like she’s on Obama’s. It’s also possible the White House is ­using the issue to keep her in line on the Iranian nuke deal...

And her problems may not end with the classified issue. Any honest prosecutor looking at her e-mails would also look for evidence she traded government favors for contributions to the Clinton Foundation or paid speeches.

END OF QUOTE

Wikipedia informs us that "The mascot for the hockey team of Mount St. Charles Academy of Woonsocket, RI is Dudley Do-Right." I don't see any team naming their mascot after Snidely Whiplash - or Hillary.

Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at 07:40 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 207 words, total size 2 kb.

No More Wives or Husbands in Washington

William Been

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/dems-declare-war-on-words-husband-wife/article/2567925

While the atrocities of Planned Parenthood are demonstrating the degradation of societal values, the Dems continue their war on our once great country by attempting to legislate the words "husband" and "wife" out of the federal government dictionary (Link above). Following their attempts to ignore God at their last convention, the Dems are clearly showing by their actions what their godless society would look like. If you are not also up to date on the Planned Parenthood, please watch one of the videos recently released concerning the harvesting and sale of body parts taken from aborted babies.

Is it any wonder that our nation has been literally transformed into subsets of people who want to change our heritage and traditions creating divisiveness beyond which most of us could have never imagined possible? While I am personally horribly disappointed in the unwillingness of the GOP elected officials to stand up to the Party of transformation and godlessness, it is much more than disappointing to watch the modern day Democrat Party where anti-American progressivism no longer remotely resembles the Democrat Party of John Kennedy.

Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at 07:22 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 192 words, total size 1 kb.

Zoey Tur's Threats to Ben Shapiro

Jack Kemp

Recently a large male-to-female transsexual named Zoey Tur threatened conservative columnist Ben Shapiro on live cable tv because Shapiro said they were essentially still a man. Carol Brown, at American Thinker, wrote an interesting article today on the subject, which brought out more facts in a discussion that included multiple follow up threats by Tur, some anti-semitic remarks on Jewish customs and an editorial in the Los Angeles Times supporting Tur's actions and Shapiro's filing of a lawsuit for legal battery against Tur.

Here below is my comment to this article:
http://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2015/07/zoey_tur_wanted_to_spank_ben_shapiro_because_hed_had_enough_comments.html#disqus_thread

Speaking of a currently sanctioned liberal temper tantrum and a transsexual wanting to have it both ways up to and including beating up on women, I give you mixed martial artist Fallon Fox. Fallon, who didn't tell mixed martial art officials that they were a male-to-female transsexual, recently broke the eye socket of a woman in a very short match. http://beforeitsnews.com/opini... Fallon is essentially disregarding the unfair advantage of "her" over 20 years male muscular development to essential steal titles and prize money from smaller women. There was a male-to-female cross trainer who was refused entry to compete with females (weight lifting is part of this sport) by the officials of those competitons, but the poor women who have to go up against Fallon Fox are essentially victims fo a guy beating up on a girl.

So transsexuals now supposedly can conviently redefine reality to their liking, at least according to the Los Angeles Times - while those transsexuals redefine Orthodox Jewish Law. A transsexual Gentile Talmudic scholar as well as a bully.

As for those who think Shapiro should have stepped out in the hall or the street to essentially settle this "man to man," I notice that in real boxing matches, they have weight classes and Zoey Tur can easily be seen to be a much larger physical person than Shapiro. It would be like a heavyweight fighter threatening to beat up a welterweight or middleweight fighter - essentially an act of bullying, not bravery. Maybe a Mad Max film would sanction such behavior (as theater), but no boxing authority would sanction such a match. It doesn't take a lot of ba...make that courage...on Zoey Tur's part to threaten to beat up on someone at least 50 lbs. less and a head shorter than them. We, be we male or female, can all find someone half our size of either sex and threaten to beat them up. It isn't an accomplishment - it's a cowardly threat.

Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at 07:21 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 428 words, total size 3 kb.

GOP Cowardice and Planned Parenthood Funding

Jack Kemp forwards this:

http://townhall.com/columnists/toddstarnes/2015/07/24/if-gop-cant-defund-planned-parenthood-they-dont-deserve-2016-white-house-n2029999?utm_source=thdaily&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=nl&newsletterad=
If GOP Can't Defund Planned Parenthood, They Don't Deserve 2016 White House
Todd Starnes | Jul 24, 2015


House Speaker John Boehner may or may not defund Planned Parenthood, telling reporters that he wants to get the facts first.
You want facts, Mr. Speaker?
Okay - call up Planned Parenthood and see what the going rate is for an aborted baby's backbone.
You want facts, sir?
How about more than a half billion American tax dollars is being used to fund Planned Parenthood’s killing fields.
But instead of taking a bold stand, he sidestepped the issue. It's outrageous. And the Republicans wonder why Donald Trump is leading in the polls right now?
I'm not a Trump supporter; I just enjoy how much he infuriates Establishment Republicans. For years, they've been campaigning as conservatives but governing as Democrats. But now the jig is up.
Donald Trump is a businessman. He knows what's selling and what's not. And more than any other candidate, he understands the conservatives aren't buying what the Republicans are selling.
So here's the bottom line: If the GOP can't muster the moral courage to defund Planned Parenthood, they don't deserve the White House in 2016.

Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at 07:20 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 208 words, total size 2 kb.

Pentagon Wants Individuals to Stop Guarding Recruitment Stations

Dana Mathewson

WHAT?

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2015/07/25/pentagon-wants-individuals-to-stop-guarding-recruiting-stations/

The Pentagon asked Friday that individuals not stand guard at the military recruiting offices in the wake of the deadly Chattanooga terror attack.

Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at 07:19 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 35 words, total size 1 kb.

Conservatives Fight Back on Campus

Dana Mathewson

About time, sez I!

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2015/07/25/conservative-groups-offers-alternative-to-new-wave-on-political-correctness-on/

A new wave of progressivism and political correctness in U.S. schools -- highlighted by "trigger warnings” and "safe zones” -- has conservative groups fighting back on campuses across the country, saying "students need to get both sides of the story.”

Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at 07:18 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 52 words, total size 1 kb.

July 25, 2015

Kanzius Cancer Machine

Jack Kemp forwards this. It is a fascinating article about a non-medical person utilizing his own background to devise a way to cure his own cancer. His machine is now in clinical trials.  Read all about it. http://www.newsweek.com/2015/07/31/kanzius-cancer-machine-gets-its-first-human-trial-355758.html

Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at 06:36 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 41 words, total size 1 kb.

July 24, 2015

Over Ten Thousand Rally in Times Square against U.S.-Iran Agreement (Updated)

Jack Kemp

The speeches in New York’s Times Square on Wednesday evening included cries of "Where is Chuck?" (Sen. Schumer, who was not present) and "Kill the Bomb!" A crowd estimated at between ten and twelve thousand lined both sides of at least six sidewalks leading south from Times Square. Speakers came from all over the country and the world to urge - make that demand - that Congress and its most high profile Jewish member Sen. Charles Schumer - put an end to the nuclear and conventional arms agreement negotiated by the Obama administration.

The first speaker was Mort Zuckerman, the publisher of the New York Daily News and U.S. News and World Report. Zuckerman quoted Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu who said "When Arabs and Israelis agree, it’s worth paying attention.” This was a reference to Israel and Saudi Arabia both being threatened by the Obama agreement and the reports of their working together to thwart it. Zuckerman also said that in this agreement Iran "won’t have to give up much” and the agreement (or deal) would only delay their development of a nuclear bomb for a few months.

After radio personality John Bachelor spoke, his Fox News associate and author Monica Crowley took to the stage to make an impassioned speech.

Crowley said, "Everyone who is here tonight in Times Square wants to save Western Civilization before it’s too late…Have we forgotten what it means (to say) Never Again?...This is a death sentence our own President has given us.”

Monica further added, in one of the early attacks along this vein, "Senator Schumer, we all know you would walk over your grandma to become the Senate Democratic Leader…It is time to step up and earn that leadership!”

She then brought up the name of Hillary Clinton – and, for the first time in my life, I heard a largely Jewish crowd in New York boo Hillary. Crowley then added:

"We need to ask Mrs. Clinton, ‘Whose side is she on? For years, she and Obama did not call for containment of Iran but for dismembering (their nuclear program). She didn’t mean it! Call Senator Schumer and request – no, demand – that he stop this deal!”

The next speaker was the former District Attorney of Manhattan, the over 95 year-old Robert Morgenthau, who spoke in a halting manner but poignantly compared the repercussions of this Iranian deal with his U.S. Navy service in WWII when his ship was sunk under him by the Japanese. Morgenthau also quoted some words President Kennedy made near the end of his life when he spoke of peace but not just "peace in our time” but "for all time.” Morgenthau then added, "This agreement is
just the opposite.”

One of the organizers of the event, Jeffrey Weisenfeld, then continued the criticism of Senator Schumer, addressing him to say, "You’re there for cereal prices. You’re there for powdered liquor (bans). You’re there for every mishigas (Yiddish for craziness or in this case, petty matters). Where are you now?...This is our civil rights (battle)! Senator Schumer, you are no Daniel Patrick Moynihan!”

The next to speak was Congressman Trent Franks of Arizona who called the agreement with Iran an "insane agreement that subordinates the sovereignty of the United States. The Iranians watched Obama. They came to the table and walked away with everything…God help us all.”

The Congressman was followed by former New York Governor George Pataki who didn’t mince words.

"We are here not as Christians, Muslims or Jews, but as Americans to stop this deal,” Pataki said. "Let me say this about Hillary Clinton,” he added as the crowd booed the mention of her name. "She was Senator on 9/11. She has embraced this agreement. America does not need an Appeaser-in-Chief! Neville Chamberlain would not sign this agreement!”

Pataki was followed by one of a few special short political films shown on a large screen, this one featuring Barack Obama. The crowd booed Obama as well. If only they had done the same in 2008 and/or 2012.

The next to speak was Harvard Law professor, Democrat, and author Alan Dershowitz, who picked up where the others left off.

"The opposition (to the Iranian agreement) must be bipartisan. It is not only a bad deal for Republicans and conservatives but also bad for Democrats and liberals.

This deal is essentially a treaty. It should be submitted to the Senate, but Obama won’t do that because he knows it will be defeated. This is similar to the 1930s deal that ceded Czechoslovakia…I have known Benjamin Netanyahu since 1973 and he (and Israel) is no Czechoslovakia and will not allow Iran to develop a nuclear arsenal. He will not farm out the defense of Israel.”

Such words coming from Dershowitz, a major political figure with much intimate knowledge of Israel, carry significance similar to an actual Israeli government statement.

The next speaker was James Woolsey, the former Director of the CIA under President Clinton, who spoke bluntly and to the point when he said "We have to choose some degree of force (not ‘boots on the ground’) and not a track to surrender and tyranny.”

Mr. Woolsey was followed by radio host Kevin McCullough, who made a very poignant point when he put on a baseball cap, saying it an adult version from his five year-old son’s kickball team.

"I wear this cap to remind me I don’t live only for myself. My son deserves to live with a nuclear free Iran.”

McCullough was followed by famed American born Israeli journalist and author Caroline Glick who traveled from Israel to be at this rally. Speaking in a strong voice, she said:

"I come to you from Jerusalem. We came home after 2000 years of yearning and we’re not going anywhere (else)!

Obama, you can trample on the U.S. Constitution but the American people do not support this deal!

Not only are the lives of the people of Israel on the line. The lives of the people of the United States of America are on the line!”

Glick added that the people of Israel live every day in defiance of those that want to kill them and they will prevail over Iran.

At this point, Dear Readers, my energy for standing stiffly in the street and jostling closely packed crowds began to wane. I heard part of what Herb London of the London Center for Policy Research had to say as I left my spot and continued to walk across the street near the speakers. Although I had earlier seen former Congressman Allen West talking to the media before the rally started, I did not see what he and some other featured speakers were able to say as the event stretched over the end of the allotted two hour time. One thing I can say is that I had heard most of the best and it would be pretty hard for others to top their words. And most of these speakers probably had behind the scene actions to go with their words.

Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at 09:02 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 1186 words, total size 7 kb.

Victory!!!

Jack Kemp


After Erick Erickson, owner of the Red State website and an ordained minister, wrote about (and possibly talked on the air about) Coca Cola's support for Planned Parenthood, the Coca-Cola company has withdrawn their support for Planned Parenthood! See below.

Dear,

Coca-Cola was listed as a corporate supporter of Planned Parenthood. They were on Planned Parenthood’s website. Various other outlets had attached Coca-Cola to Planned Parenthood.

This morning I received this email to my radio station's email account. Coke will not contribute to Planned Parenthood and will not match employee contributions to the organ harvesters either.
Sincerely yours,

Erick-Woods Erickson

Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at 08:47 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 103 words, total size 2 kb.

Milbank and the Confederate Flag

Brian Birdnow takes on Dana Milbank for his rant on the Confederate flag and Obama:

http://www.stltoday.com/news/opinion/columns/dana-milbank/dana-milbank-obama-s-perfect-response-to-confederate-flag-wavers/article_8a47d1ab-2e3e-5cfa-898e-f80e57044f35.html

Dear Mr. Milbank,
Yesterday, July 22nd I read your column entitled "Obama's Perfect Response to Confederate Flag Wavers", subtitled: "Race relations: President Aims to Get America Moving Forward". Certainly, your efforts to promote a failed President comes as no surprise, considering your fulsome praise of this man for the last eight years. . You note the "appalling" spectacle of protestors waving the Confederate battle flag as the Presidential motorcade pulled up to an event in Oklahoma City. The possibility that these demonstrators were protesting the new liberal assault on the Confederate flag does not register in your mind. No, this is "...all the more repugnant..." because Obama is the first black president. Would that you had shown this same level of outrage at people chanting to the effect that George W. Bush was a murderer back in 2003 over Iraq, and in 2005 after Hurricane Katrina.

You then segued into the meat of your column wherein you argued that it is time for Obama and all other right-thinking Americans to take a more aggressive stand against our white racists. In what seems to be a strange method of moving toward racial understanding you quote one Ta-Nehisi Coates, who you said "holds out little hope for white Americans..." , who you quote as saying "...the stage where they painted themselves white, is the deathbed of us all", and you further quote, approvingly as saying, "...the plunder of black life was drilled into this country in its infancy and reinforced across its history."

I do not believe, sir, that you or the Washington Post (or your syndicated network) would have dared to print something as highly charged and critical of a different race. Since the target is the Caucasian race that makes this incendiary charge and language permissible. Since you seem to be indulging in a bout of self-flagellation here, let me ask you once more: Would you have dared to print anything as critical of another race as that which you used in yesterday's editorial? I request the courtesy of a response, although I doubt that I will receive one!

With Kindest Regards,
Brian E. Birdnow

Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at 08:45 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 376 words, total size 3 kb.

Allen West at his best

Wil Wirtanen


The take away line paraphrasing "Obama claims that this deal is something that no one has done before, that is because no one has done something so stupid before”

Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at 08:37 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 37 words, total size 1 kb.

American Thinker bans my comment on their update to my 2006 AT story

Jack Kemp

Today American Thinker ran an updated story concerning the years long fight to keep the Mt. Soledad Cross on land just north of San Diego. The land is now likely to be sold by the government to private owners. A straight forward story with these initial lines:

http://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2015/07/mt_soledads_sale_could_leave_aclu_without_a_prayer_.html

BEGIN QUOTE

The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) may have run out of bullets to fire at the Mount Soledad Veterans Memorial in San Diego and its 29-foot Latin cross.

High atop a mountain just north of downtown, the cross has driven the ACLU bonkers for years. The Mount Soledad Memorial Association announced Monday that it bought the half-acre of federal land on which the monument stands from the Defense Department for $1.4 million. The National Defense Authorization Act of 2015 included a provision calling for the sale.

END OF QUOTE

Well, they left out a part of this story, namely my bringing this to light at American Thinker in 2006 in a blog post called "Proof that there are Stupid Jews."http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2006/08/proof_that_there_are_stupid_je.htmlThat lead to another AT writer, Ethel Fenig passionately opposing me and American Thinker glad to post both my words, Ethel's and my rebuttal of Ethel.http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2006/08/dissenting_views_on_public_cro.htmlfor the interesting controversy and the readers the story drew.

Now we come back to a comment I posted to today's (July 24, 2015) American Thinker article on the Mt. Soledad before 5 a.m. which I include below that mentions what I summarized above as well as a few additional facts not part of the AT exchanges between myself and Ethel Fenig. This comment was immediately pulled for review and as of 10 a.m. this morning, it has not been allowed to be posted at American Thinker, showing one of the reasons I no longer write there. This is my original AT story and the board censors at American Thinker deem my claiming ownership to it in civil language too "controversial" or impolite or whatever to be posted. I used a lot nicer language than Donald Trump used about Sen. McCain.

I took the precaution of copying my conmment to a file of mine and here is what I had to say today at Amer. Thinker about the Mt. Soledad story, what they removed:

BEGIN QUOTE

Halleluejah! Years ago, in a blog piece at Amer. Thinker, I took the Jewish War Veterans to task over this. AT writer Ethel Fenig posted a counter argument and I replied to her, saying among other things, that nations have their religious symbols on their property and flags - including the Star of David on the Israeli flag. Speaking as a Jew, I'm glad for what looks like a pending victory for the La Jolla Cross. Ethel, in a private email to me, said this cross was "unconstitutional." I replied by asking her if she could name the Article and Paragraph of the U.S. Constituition where it says this. I have been waiting since 2006 for that reply from Ethel. A former AT writer, a Jewish immigrant from the Soviet Union, when I mentioned this story to her in person, immediately said, "First the Jews want protection by the Christian police officers and then they attack their religion." Coming from a country where both Jewish and Christian religious practices were attacked by the State, she immediately realized the folly of the Jewish War Veterans in this matter. I also later told Ethel Fenig that the partners in this lawsuit, the ACLU, had filed to protect the Westboro Baptist Church in their vile insults at military funerals where they yelled "God hates fags." That means the ACLU was attempting to legitimize people who might well be yelling derisive statements at the future funerals of the Jewish War Veterans themselves.

END QUOTE

Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at 08:27 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 635 words, total size 4 kb.

July 23, 2015

Over Ten Thousand Rally in Times Square against U.S.-Iran Agreement

Jack Kemp

The speeches in New York’s Times Square on Wednesday evening included cries of "Where is Chuck?" (Sen. Schumer, who was not present) and "Kill the Bomb!" A crowd estimated at between ten and twelve thousand lined both sides of at least six sidewalks leading south from Times Square. Speakers came from all over the country and the world to urge - make that demand - that Congress and its most high profile Jewish member Sen. Charles Schumer - put an end to the nuclear and conventional arms agreement negotiated by the Obama administration.

The first speaker was Mort Zuckerman, the publisher of the New York Daily News and U.S. News and World Report. Zuckerman quoted Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu who said "When Arabs and Israelis agree, it’s worth paying attention.” This was a reference to Israel and Saudi Arabia both being threatened by the Obama agreement and the reports of their working together to thwart it. Zuckerman also said that in this agreement Iran "won’t have to give up much” and the agreement (or deal) would only delay their development of a nuclear bomb for a few months.

After radio personality John Bachelor spoke, his Fox News associate and author Monica Crowley took to the stage to make an impassioned speech.

Crowley said, "Everyone who is here tonight in Times Square wants to save Western Civilization before it’s too late…Have we forgotten what it means (to say) Never Again?...This is a death sentence our own President has given us.”

Monica further added, in one of the early attacks along this vein, "Senator Schumer, we all know you would walk over your grandma to become the Senate Democratic Leader…It is time to step up and earn that leadership!”

She then brought up the name of Hillary Clinton – and, for the first time in my life, I heard a largely Jewish crowd in New York boo Hillary. Crowley then added:

"We need to ask Mrs. Clinton, ‘Whose side is she on? For years, she and Obama did not call for containment of Iran but for dismembering (their nuclear program). She didn’t mean it! Call Senator Schumer and request – no, demand – that he stop this deal!”

The next speaker was the former District Attorney of Manhattan, the over 95 year-old Robert Morgenthau, who spoke in a halting manner but poignantly compared the repercussions of this Iranian deal with his U.S. Navy service in WWII when his ship was sunk under him by the Japanese. Morgenthau also quoted some words President Kennedy made near the end of his life when he spoke of peace but not just "peace in our time” but "for all time.” Morgenthau then added, "This agreement is just the opposite.”

One of the organizers of the event, Jeffrey Weisenfeld, then continued the criticism of Senator Schumer, addressing him to say, "You’re there for cereal prices. You’re there for powdered liquor (bans). You’re there for every mishigas (Yiddish for craziness or in this case, petty matters). Where are you now?...This is our civil rights (battle)! Senator Schumer, you are no Daniel Patrick Moynihan!”

The next to speak was Congressman Trent Franks of Arizona who called the agreement with Iran an "insane agreement that subordinates the sovereignty of the United States. The Iranians watched Obama. They came to the table and walked away with everything…God help us all.”

The Congressman was followed by former New York Governor George Pataki who didn’t mince words.

"We are here not as Christians, Muslims or Jews, but as Americans to stop this deal,” Pataki said. "Let me say this about Hillary Clinton,” he added as the crowd booed the mention of her name. "She was Senator on 9/11. She has embraced this agreement. America does not need an Appeaser-in-Chief! Neville Chamberlain would not sign this agreement!”

Pataki was followed by one of a few special short political films shown on a large screen, this one featuring Barack Obama. The crowd booed Obama as well. If only they had done the same in 2008 and/or 2012.

The next to speak was Harvard Law professor, Democrat, and author Alan Dershowitz, who picked up where the others left off.

"The opposition (to the Iranian agreement) must be bipartisan. It is not only a bad deal for Republicans and conservatives but also bad for Democrats and liberals. This deal is essentially a treaty. It should be submitted to the Senate, but Obama won’t do that because he knows it will be defeated. This is similar to the 1930s deal that ceded Czechoslovakia…I have known Benjamin Netanyahu since 1973 and he (and Israel) is no Czechoslovakia and will not allow Iran to develop a nuclear arsenal. He will not farm out the defense of Israel.”

Such words coming from Dershowitz, a major political figure with much intimate knowledge of Israel, carry significance similar to an actual Israeli government statement.

The next speaker was James Woolsey, the former Director of the CIA under President Clinton, who spoke bluntly and to the point when he said "We have to choose some degree of force (not ‘boots on the ground’) and not a track to surrender and tyranny.”

Mr. Woolsey was followed by radio host Kevin McCullough, who made a very poignant point when he put on a baseball cap, saying it an adult version from his five year-old son’s kickball team.

"I wear this cap to remind me I don’t live only for myself. My son deserves to live with a nuclear free Iran.”

McCullough was followed by famed American born Israeli journalist and author Caroline Glick who traveled from Israel to be at this rally. Speaking in a strong voice, she said:

"I come to you from Jerusalem. We came home after 2000 years of yearning and we’re not going anywhere (else)!

Obama, you can trample on the U.S. Constitution but the American people do not support this deal!

Not only are the lives of the people of Israel on the line. The lives of the people of the United States of America are on the line!”

Glick added that the people of Israel live every day in defiance of those that want to kill them and they will prevail over Iran.

At this point, Dear Readers, my energy for standing stiffly in the street and jostling closely packed crowds began to wane. I heard part of what Herb London of the London Center for Policy Research had to say as I left my spot and continued to walk across the street near the speakers. Although I had earlier seen former Congressman Allen West talking to the media before the rally started, I did not see what he and some other featured speakers were able to say as the event stretched over the end of the allotted two hour time. One thing I can say is that I had heard most of the best and it would be pretty hard for others to top their words. And most of these speakers probably had behind the scene actions to go with their words.

Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at 12:52 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 1221 words, total size 28 kb.

Venus and Earth; Why are they Different?

Timothy Birdnow

A recent paper in the journal Nature Geoscience by researchers at the University of British Columbia suggest that the Earth is habitable today because it was bombarded in the past by space debris, while Venus, the Earth's "twin" was not. This, these researchers believe, is why these two worlds are so different.

According to the Anthony Watts:

The research, published this week in Nature Geoscience, suggests that Earth’s first crust, which was rich in radioactive heat-producing elements such as uranium and potassium, was torn from the planet and lost to space when asteroids bombarded the planet early in its history. This phenomenon, known as impact erosion, helps explain a landmark discovery made over a decade ago about the Earth’s composition.

Researchers with the University of British Columbia and University of California, Santa Barbara say that the early loss of these two elements ultimately determined the evolution of Earth’s plate tectonics, magnetic field and climate.

"The events that define the early formation and bulk composition of Earth govern, in part, the subsequent tectonic, magnetic and climatic histories of our planet, all of which have to work together to create the Earth in which we live,” said Mark Jellinek, a professor in the Department of Earth, Ocean & Atmospheric Sciences at UBC. "It’s these events that potentially differentiate Earth from other planets.”

On Earth, shifting tectonic plates cause regular overturning of Earth’s surface, which steadily cools the underlying mantle, maintains the planet’s strong magnetic field and stimulates volcanic activity. Erupting volcanoes release greenhouse gases from deep inside the planet and regular eruptions help to maintain the habitable climate that distinguishes Earth from all other rocky planets.

Venus is the most similar planet to Earth in terms of size, mass, density, gravity and composition. While Earth has had a stable and habitable climate over geological time, Venus is in a climate catastrophe with a thick carbon dioxide atmosphere and surface temperatures reaching about 470 C. In this study, Jellinek and Matt Jackson, an associate professor at the University of California, explain why the two planets could have evolved so differently.

"Earth could have easily ended up like present day Venus,” said Jellinek. "A key difference that can tip the balance, however, may be differing extents of impact erosion.”

With less impact erosion, Venus would cool episodically with catastrophic swings in the intensity of volcanic activity driving dramatic and billion-year-long swings in climate.

"We played out this impact erosion story forward in time and we were able to show that the effect of the conditions governing the initial composition of a planet can have profound consequences for its evolution. It’s a very special set of circumstances that make Earth.”

End excerpt.

This is interesting and it may help to explain the differences between the Earth and Venus, but is only a partial explanation. Venus is 25 million miles closer to the Sun, and that in itself is an important factor. It's believed that Venus was originally around 200* F and had water oceans until the Sun warmed up, driving the temperature of Venus up and boiling away all of the water (a greenhouse gas) which eventually split into it's constituent parts and floated away. That didn't happen on the cooler Earth.

Also, it should be remembered that Venus rotates very slowly and retrograde. This is not inconsequential; the slow rotation means Venus has a thin crust, one that is always breaking with volcanic vents. Unlike the Earth which has a few volcanic openings these vents spew carbon dioxide into the Venusian atmosphere at an alarming rate. Rotation of the planet would have seen to it that heavier elements were well below the crust while lighter elements would tend to spin upward. It's a bit different than a centrifuge, because there is gravity holding down the heavier elements as the planet rotates. But the rotation assuredly moves things up to the crust. Or it should.

The Earth's core is largely nickle and iron because the lighter elements drifted upward. Venus, with a slow rotation, would find all sorts of heavy elements - the kind subject to nuclear decay - closer to the surface, heating the crust at a greater rate.

Also, one must ask why Venus is retrograde. Was it hit by a large body as some point? The bombardment theory makes a great deal of sense.

Also, Venus does not have a satellite. The Earth's moon is a planetary sized body in it's own right, and tidal forces from the Moon help strip away part of the Earth's atmosphere. Venus was nay so lucky, and as the planet outgased it had no way of losing the air.

So our poor "twin" is an absolutely useless place from a human perspective, and should we develop the technology to terraform planets it will likely be last on our list (along with the gas giants). It will just be too much work to make Venus even marginally habitable. Why bother?

One thing is certain; carbon dioxide is not the cause of Venus's problems. CO2 is a symptom of the disease.

Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at 07:09 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 852 words, total size 6 kb.

<< Page 1 of 534 >>
130kb generated in CPU 0.07, elapsed 0.1458 seconds.
28 queries taking 0.0976 seconds, 177 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.