During the 2008 Presidential campaign (now known socialist) Senator Barack Obama told audiences "Judge me by the people with whom I surround myself."
Okay, comrade ...... we WILL:
Wednesday, December 9, 2009
A "Visual" of our Prez and his history
I've been reading about and preaching about this, but our buddy butt (lol) found the visual. If it's too small for you to read I can email you the file to print out your size!!! emstownhall@yahoo.com
During the 2008 Presidential campaign (now known socialist) Senator Barack Obama told audiences "Judge me by the people with whom I surround myself."
During the 2008 Presidential campaign (now known socialist) Senator Barack Obama told audiences "Judge me by the people with whom I surround myself."
GAIA at work
Picked this up from an Australian forum unsigned so can't give he/she credit but it is a great read:
H2O is water. CO2 is carbon dioxide.
Lets see, CO2 + H20 + Light energy and photosynthisis strips the Carbon from the Oxygen in CO2, the Hydrogen from the oxygen in the Water, and gives Carbon and Hydrogen compounds (celulose or wood) + O (oxygen).
Later, when the lightning strikes, the oxygen recombines with the carbon and the hydrogen in the celulose (wood) and the rusulting fire gives you CO2 and water as the products of combustion. A natural carbon cycle.
Lots of CO2 and heat? Lots of plants and trees. Too many plants and trees? Lots of oxygen and fuel. One ligtning strike and the cycle repeats. Man is totaly unnecessary.
The FOOD CHAIN is dependent on that horible toxic chemical CO2? You mean CO2 may not be a polutant after all? It just might be necessary for life on earth as we know it? "Gaia" uses a CO2 cycle to produce life. The warmer the big bright thing in the sky makes things, the more CO2 gets driven out of soulution in the ocean.
Yes photosynthesis is working in the ocean as well. Remember phytoplankton? OK, ever see bubles come out of Coke as it warms up? Thats CO2 just in case you never took the time to think about it. And the big bright thing in the sky? Astronomers call it a variable star. That means it's heat output is not constant. Nor is our orbit around the sun a perfect elipse.
Ever have a top when you were a kid? It starts to wobble when the spin slows down right? Physics calls that precessional rotation. The earth does that. The rotational period is 23,000 years. The same ice age cycle that was noticed in the 1.5 mile deep ice core sample taken in Antartica that reads like tree rings going back 150,000 years. Yup, the traped gas bubles in the ice can be read for exact % of CO2, CH4, O and N in a gas chromatograph.
When the north pole is pointed more directly at the sun, the ice melts at the north pole. Simple enough. The list of things that give us climate change is very long and we have not even discoverd half of whats on it, none of which are caused by man. Most of the natural causes of our climate change make what man does on this earth laughably insignificant. One big forest fire puts out more CO2 than the UK can possibly tax in 10 years.
By the way UK, follow the money! Our climate is driven by the sun. Not by George Soros and his progressive team mates in the UN and our government.
H2O is water. CO2 is carbon dioxide.
Lets see, CO2 + H20 + Light energy and photosynthisis strips the Carbon from the Oxygen in CO2, the Hydrogen from the oxygen in the Water, and gives Carbon and Hydrogen compounds (celulose or wood) + O (oxygen).
Later, when the lightning strikes, the oxygen recombines with the carbon and the hydrogen in the celulose (wood) and the rusulting fire gives you CO2 and water as the products of combustion. A natural carbon cycle.
Lots of CO2 and heat? Lots of plants and trees. Too many plants and trees? Lots of oxygen and fuel. One ligtning strike and the cycle repeats. Man is totaly unnecessary.
The FOOD CHAIN is dependent on that horible toxic chemical CO2? You mean CO2 may not be a polutant after all? It just might be necessary for life on earth as we know it? "Gaia" uses a CO2 cycle to produce life. The warmer the big bright thing in the sky makes things, the more CO2 gets driven out of soulution in the ocean.
Yes photosynthesis is working in the ocean as well. Remember phytoplankton? OK, ever see bubles come out of Coke as it warms up? Thats CO2 just in case you never took the time to think about it. And the big bright thing in the sky? Astronomers call it a variable star. That means it's heat output is not constant. Nor is our orbit around the sun a perfect elipse.
Ever have a top when you were a kid? It starts to wobble when the spin slows down right? Physics calls that precessional rotation. The earth does that. The rotational period is 23,000 years. The same ice age cycle that was noticed in the 1.5 mile deep ice core sample taken in Antartica that reads like tree rings going back 150,000 years. Yup, the traped gas bubles in the ice can be read for exact % of CO2, CH4, O and N in a gas chromatograph.
When the north pole is pointed more directly at the sun, the ice melts at the north pole. Simple enough. The list of things that give us climate change is very long and we have not even discoverd half of whats on it, none of which are caused by man. Most of the natural causes of our climate change make what man does on this earth laughably insignificant. One big forest fire puts out more CO2 than the UK can possibly tax in 10 years.
By the way UK, follow the money! Our climate is driven by the sun. Not by George Soros and his progressive team mates in the UN and our government.
Tuesday, December 8, 2009
The "Nuance" of Progressivism
Ran across this article from June 2009 and several parts caught my attention. Excerpts in italics.
It's that "using narratives and frames that his audience will accept" that first made me think hmmmm. Remember, he's creating a feeling. It's not so much what he says but also what he doesn't say and where he is leading you.
how Obama, by taking a more moderate and understanding tone, created the conditions necessary
Created the Conditions necessary. By not using the word terrorists, he had the Arabs actually listening.
How many times has he done that to us?
We are five days away from fundamentally transforming the United States of America.
Oh we were all so tired of the Bush years and the lying Republican politicians, change sounded so good that we didn't stop to think that in order to "fundamentally" change the United States of America we would have to set aside our Founding Fathers vision of America since we no longer resembled that anyway. We didn't stop to think that in order to "fundamentally change" we would have to give up our liberty and freedom. Our property rights would be forfeited for "the common good".
The writer of the article thinks Obama may be pretending to be "centrist" (writers choice of words not mine) in order to make the Republicans look more extreme, to basically trick the moderates into giving him a second term. The writer thinks he is appeasing the Republicans. Again, don't know if I agree with that but this is interesting:
Will the American public pick up that nuance? Or will they buy the Republican rhetoric that Obama is a socialist dictator running our economy into the ground?
Will we?
Even more so, will packaging progressive ideas in moderate language make more Americans open to progressive policies...
Open to Progressive policies! How marvelous!
This is not one of the movement's better writers, but was probably more open and honest than most, or even more so than they would like for us to see. This is why you have slowly heard more and more politicians and public figures talking about the necessity of a little bit of socialism, it won't kill ya!!!! Heard the expression "nickel and dime ya to death"?
I've always heard that the best way to defeat an enemy is to understand him. We all need to read more of their (gag) writings. Saul Alinsky for starters.
As an example of how ignorant the referenced writer is, here's a post blasting Bush for saying Iran has or ever will have nukes. Gee, just two years after and where is Iran with it's nuclear program now?
Unfortunately for us, not all their supporters are this inept.
But most dramatic of all was what he omitted – any reference to ‘terrorism’ or ‘terrorists’.
Wow, who would have thought that word would not come out of an American President’s mouth in a foreign policy speech until 2030? Obama certainly has dramatically shifted the foreign policy tone of the Bush Administration.
This shift in tone is highly welcome. Obama once again showed he has a grasp of using narratives and frames that his audience will accept. If you are speaking to an Arab group and state that Israel must dismantle its settlements, you immediately open them up to your message. That is one example of how Obama, by taking a more moderate and understanding tone, created the conditions necessary for his Arab listeners to even consider other messages, such as women’s rights.It's that "using narratives and frames that his audience will accept" that first made me think hmmmm. Remember, he's creating a feeling. It's not so much what he says but also what he doesn't say and where he is leading you.
how Obama, by taking a more moderate and understanding tone, created the conditions necessary
Created the Conditions necessary. By not using the word terrorists, he had the Arabs actually listening.
How many times has he done that to us?
We are five days away from fundamentally transforming the United States of America.
Oh we were all so tired of the Bush years and the lying Republican politicians, change sounded so good that we didn't stop to think that in order to "fundamentally" change the United States of America we would have to set aside our Founding Fathers vision of America since we no longer resembled that anyway. We didn't stop to think that in order to "fundamentally change" we would have to give up our liberty and freedom. Our property rights would be forfeited for "the common good".
The writer of the article thinks Obama may be pretending to be "centrist" (writers choice of words not mine) in order to make the Republicans look more extreme, to basically trick the moderates into giving him a second term. The writer thinks he is appeasing the Republicans. Again, don't know if I agree with that but this is interesting:
Will the American public pick up that nuance? Or will they buy the Republican rhetoric that Obama is a socialist dictator running our economy into the ground?
Will we?
Even more so, will packaging progressive ideas in moderate language make more Americans open to progressive policies...
Open to Progressive policies! How marvelous!
This is not one of the movement's better writers, but was probably more open and honest than most, or even more so than they would like for us to see. This is why you have slowly heard more and more politicians and public figures talking about the necessity of a little bit of socialism, it won't kill ya!!!! Heard the expression "nickel and dime ya to death"?
I've always heard that the best way to defeat an enemy is to understand him. We all need to read more of their (gag) writings. Saul Alinsky for starters.
As an example of how ignorant the referenced writer is, here's a post blasting Bush for saying Iran has or ever will have nukes. Gee, just two years after and where is Iran with it's nuclear program now?
Unfortunately for us, not all their supporters are this inept.
Monday, December 7, 2009
Friday, December 4, 2009
Notes for climate change debate
These are a lot of miscellaneous notes I've been collecting on global warming, climate change, whatever you want to call it. Enjoy!
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Methane gas levels are a key element of Anthroprogenic Global Warming BUT they are NOT INCREASING as required by the Goracle's poition (how inconvenient):
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2009/10/10/that-worrisome-methane-beast-apparently-is-still-not-awake/#more-11616
And ocean tempatures are falling, as a result, sea ice amounts are increasing, which is not in the Goracle's plans (remeber the Polar Bears?
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2009/10/09/ocean-heat-content-dropping/#more-11620
And finally, more truth about the debate in IRANIAN newspapers than the New York Times and other American newspapers.
http://host.madison.com/wsj/news/local/article_dacf39c7-c2f8-5718-a5a0-d0cfb39f80bc.html?mode=comments&page=2
Conclusion: If it weren't for the internet, The Goracle and his liberal allies would have won this argument through the control of information if it weren't for alternate information sources.
Much of our MEDIA HAVE TURNED INTO WHORES WHO PRODUCE OPINIONS RATHER THAN PRESENT NEWS AND FACTS.
Consensus among scientists? Hardly. 31,000 have said no.
http://www.aim.org/briefing/31000-signatures-prove-no-consensus-about-global-warming/
---------------------------------------------------------------
Analysis on Cap & Trade by US House of Representatives, Oversight Committee:
http://www.scribd.com/doc/14848063/Report-CapAndTrade-Energy-Tax-Will-Cause-Redistribution-of-Wealth-among-States-and-Working-Families
-------------------------------------------------------------------
And one of my favorite items:
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2009/04/26/ice-at-the-north-pole-in-1958-not-so-thick/
A sub surfacing in open water - AT THE NORTH POLE! In 1959 no less.
We can and should continue to find sources of energy that are sustainable, cheap and non-polluting. But there is NO scientific consensus that we should run for the hills, under a table, quit eating meat, etc. Infact, the only reason man became an intelligent part of the earth was through the protein from meat and COOKING it! Ask any anthropologist. We NEED that meat. Course that could explain why libs are so stupid.... pardon me I digress.
NO to Copenhagen, NO to the crap & tax bill. That would destroy our economy and then where would we be, warming and cooking with charcoal and wood fires, now THAT is what is called an unintended consequence.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Methane gas levels are a key element of Anthroprogenic Global Warming BUT they are NOT INCREASING as required by the Goracle's poition (how inconvenient):
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2009/10/10/that-worrisome-methane-beast-apparently-is-still-not-awake/#more-11616
And ocean tempatures are falling, as a result, sea ice amounts are increasing, which is not in the Goracle's plans (remeber the Polar Bears?
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2009/10/09/ocean-heat-content-dropping/#more-11620
And finally, more truth about the debate in IRANIAN newspapers than the New York Times and other American newspapers.
http://host.madison.com/wsj/news/local/article_dacf39c7-c2f8-5718-a5a0-d0cfb39f80bc.html?mode=comments&page=2
Conclusion: If it weren't for the internet, The Goracle and his liberal allies would have won this argument through the control of information if it weren't for alternate information sources.
Much of our MEDIA HAVE TURNED INTO WHORES WHO PRODUCE OPINIONS RATHER THAN PRESENT NEWS AND FACTS.
- http://johngalt.podomatic.com/
Consensus among scientists? Hardly. 31,000 have said no.
http://www.aim.org/briefing/31000-signatures-prove-no-consensus-about-global-warming/
---------------------------------------------------------------
Analysis on Cap & Trade by US House of Representatives, Oversight Committee:
http://www.scribd.com/doc/14848063/Report-CapAndTrade-Energy-Tax-Will-Cause-Redistribution-of-Wealth-among-States-and-Working-Families
-------------------------------------------------------------------
And one of my favorite items:
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2009/04/26/ice-at-the-north-pole-in-1958-not-so-thick/
A sub surfacing in open water - AT THE NORTH POLE! In 1959 no less.
We can and should continue to find sources of energy that are sustainable, cheap and non-polluting. But there is NO scientific consensus that we should run for the hills, under a table, quit eating meat, etc. Infact, the only reason man became an intelligent part of the earth was through the protein from meat and COOKING it! Ask any anthropologist. We NEED that meat. Course that could explain why libs are so stupid.... pardon me I digress.
NO to Copenhagen, NO to the crap & tax bill. That would destroy our economy and then where would we be, warming and cooking with charcoal and wood fires, now THAT is what is called an unintended consequence.
Wednesday, December 2, 2009
Glenn Beck Refounders as of 12/01/09
They now number 10!
One of them is saying you can count on your hands the number of people that have read the Afghanistan report. That's a shame, it's reported that the information in that report is "eye-opening".
One of them is saying you can count on your hands the number of people that have read the Afghanistan report. That's a shame, it's reported that the information in that report is "eye-opening".
Monday, November 30, 2009
What I would do about Iran
Seems the more we, the United States and a handful of other nations try to do to curb Ahmadinajad from continuing his march toward nuclear arms, the more he and the mullahs demonstrate they have no intention of giving in to any pressure.
So what to do?
1. Admit once and for all that Iran wants nuclear weapons and do not care what the UN or anyone else in the world thinks about it.
2. Tell Iran, fine, go ahead and build your weapons. But if we see you even look cross eyed at another nation with your weapons, we'll just wipe you off the face of the earth.
Period. Move on to next problem.
So what to do?
1. Admit once and for all that Iran wants nuclear weapons and do not care what the UN or anyone else in the world thinks about it.
2. Tell Iran, fine, go ahead and build your weapons. But if we see you even look cross eyed at another nation with your weapons, we'll just wipe you off the face of the earth.
Period. Move on to next problem.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
