Let's take a quick look at the climate change delimma 3

It is an unfortunate truth that so much of science today is fraudulent.  This item details that roughly 70% of all scientific studies cannot be duplicated, and that includes climate science.  Quote: "BBC News Science Correspondent Tom Feilden noted last week, "Science is facing a 'reproducibility crisis' where more than two-thirds of researchers have tried and failed to reproduce another scientist's experiments, research suggests." This isn't just his journalistic opinion, but the conclusion of the University of Virginia's Center for Open Science, which estimates that roughly 70% of all studies can't be reproduced.  And this includes the field of climate change, by the way. It's a disaster. Being able to reproduce others' experiments or findings from models is at the very heart of science. Yet, radical climate change advocates would have us spend 2% of global GDP, or roughly $1.5 trillion a year, to forestall a minuscule amount of anticipated warming based on dubious modeling and experiments.   Meanwhile, the federal government spends literally billions of dollars a year on climate change, with virtually none of the money funding scientists who doubt the climate change threat. There is no serious debate. This is a problem for all of science.  Worse, our government's own science fraud is a big problem. Dr. John Bates, a former top scientist at National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, recently detailed how a government paper that called into question the 18-year "pause" in global warming was based on "experimental" data and politicized. That "paper" was used to justify President Obama's signing of the Paris climate agreement."    http://www.investors.com/politics/editorials/is-global-warming-science-just-a-fraud/   

There are a good number of additional reasons but I will stop here.  

Do we want to continue to be conned into believing lies based on flawed scientific studies funded by governments who use climate change to promote the socialist game of robbing the rich and giving it to others and calling it saving the planet from calamitous  "climate change"?   

Concluding Thoughts.

Here is an assessment that speaks to the arrogance of the climate change advocates and their intense disdain for those who do not accept their plans.  Quote: "Let me pause to protest this “denial” language. It attempts to appropriate the widely shared disgust toward “Holocaust denial,” a bizarre and bedraggled movement that belittles or even dismisses the actual history of one of the 20th century’s most egregious mass crimes against human rights and dignity. Using that language to silence questions about an attempt to centrally plan the energy sector is a moral low that debases the language of denial.  This rhetorical trick reveals all you need to know about the desperate manipulation the climate planners are willing to engage in to realize their plot regardless of popular and justified skepticism concerning their regulatory and redistributionist policies.  And you wonder why many people have doubts about it. And what are the specifics of that agenda? The Paris Agreement is a “voluntary” agreement because its architects knew it would never pass the US Senate as a treaty. Why? Because the idea of the agreement is that the US government’s regulatory agencies would impose extreme mandates on its energy sector: how it should work, what kinds of emissions it should produce, the best ways to power our lives (read: not fossil fuels), and hand over to developing world regimes billions and even trillions of dollars in aid, a direct and ongoing forcible transfer of wealth from American taxpayers to regimes all over the world, at the expense of American freedom and prosperity.  And you wonder why many people have doubts about it."  And, "You might think that the election of Trump would offer some lessons. But that is not the way the arrogant minds behind the climate agreement work. They respond by merely doubling down on disdain, intensifying their commitments to each other, heaping more loathing on the workers and peasants who have their doubts about these deals."     https://fee.org/articles/the-amazing-arrogance-of-the-paris-climate-agreement/? 

The state of climate change is in fact on thin ice.   This piece provides a partial explanation. Quote: "Sometimes, reality is too painful for progressives to confront. That’s when they typically start creating their own alternative realities. As Andrew Klavan and Ben Shapiro demonstrate, both the hysteria and the reality of climate change are not really helpful as far as producing solutions that will actually benefit mankind."  And, "From Klavan’s perspective, movies like Al Gore’s An Inconvenient Truth present a fiction that while gripping, bears no resemblance to actual reality. Therefore, solving the “problems” it presents is like hypothesizing all of the ways a fictional movie’s villain can live on to see two or three hugely profitable sequels.  In short, climate change believers are either living in a fantasy, or a nightmare that’s in such slow-motion that it’s possible to walk out for popcorn and literally not to have missed a thing when one returns."  Watch the video.    http://patrioticviralnews.com/articles/the-day-climate-change-theory-was-killed-off/

This is a quote taken from a CFACT.org email.  "The President is absolutely correct that "this agreement is less about the climate and more about other countries gaining a financial advantage over the United States."  The UN's own computer models reveal the Paris Agreement would bring about no meaningful adjustment to the temperature of the Earth – even if every nation complied with it 100% – which will never happen.  Strangling America's energy supply while other nations expand their use of fossil fuels as fast as their economies will allow does nothing to reduce carbon dioxide emissions (assuming that’s even desirable) or affect the climate, unless you're talking about the economic climate in nations like China and India that are keen to manufacture the products we price our factories out of.  As the President pointed out, "under the agreement, China will be able to increase these emissions by a staggering number of years — 13.  They can do whatever they want for 13 years.  Not us.  India makes its participation contingent on receiving billions and billions and billions of dollars in foreign aid from developed countries.  There are many other examples.  But the bottom line is that the Paris Accord is very unfair, at the highest level, to the United States."  On his way out the door President Obama raided the treasury and transferred a billion dollars to the UN "Green Climate Fund."  The UN is looking for $2 billion more from America right away and to ramp up to even larger sums from there.  President Trump is not going to play this game anymore. He said, "In 2015, the Green Climate Fund’s executive director reportedly stated that estimated funding needed would increase to $450 billion per year after 2020.  And nobody even knows where the money is going to."   

George Burns

Let's take a quick look at the climate change delimma 2

Discussion.

Given the admissions in the previous two paragraphs one has to carefully consider their comments.  They are not random people you finds on the streets. They are high level insiders in the climate change world.  They know of what they speak.  It helps make sense of the rampant illogical conclusions offered by global warming/climate change advocates whether they are scientists, government officials, mainstream media types or anyone else.  Their agenda is to scare people into believing the fraud they are perpetrating on average run of the mill human beings.  Their message:  If we do not believe in climate change we do not care for the planet and future generations.  We are part of the problem and must get on the save the planet team.  What follows are random points that are used and repeated over and over again until the gullible and uninformed buy into their propaganda.

Here is what the Paris agreement proposes to deliver.  You will notice that it does not exactly have fixed goals or binding agreements. Quote: "The central goal of the agreement is laid out in one phrase: "Holding the increase in global average temperature to well below 2 degrees C above pre-industrial levels ..." Limiting the rise in temperature to 2 degrees (3.6 degrees Fahrenheit) has been discussed as a global goal for several years now. That amount of warming will still have a substantial impact, scientists say, but will be less devastating than allowing temperatures to rise unchecked."   Also notable is this part of the agreement.  "To help developing countries switch from fossil fuels to greener sources of energy and adapt to the effects of climate change, the developed world will provide $100 billion a year," NPR's Christopher Joyce reports.  But that amount is identified as a "floor," not a ceiling. "Developed countries won inclusion of language that would up the ante in subsequent years," he explains, "so that financial aid will keep ramping up over time."   http://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2017/06/01/531048986/so-what-exactly-is-in-the-paris-climate-accord   This funding transfer appears to be the most important part of the agreement and the most desirable to poor countries.  There appears to be limited controls over how the money is spent once in the hands of the leadership of beneficiary countries.  History of such arrangements is that little if any will be used as intended.  This is a huge flaw.

The logic of treating CO2 as a pollutant is a patently false proposition.  As this item points out, "... eliminating carbon dioxide is genocide against plants."  So to carry that logic further, since plant life is critical to support animal life, including humans, it can be considered participation in the committing of genocide against the human race.  It is a truly oxymoronic proposition.  Quote: Yet, "The primary goal of the Paris Climate Accord — the reduction of atmospheric carbon dioxide — is nothing less than genocide against all plant life across our planet. That’s because all plants depend on CO2 for their very survival. It’s the “oxygen” for plants, and right now trees, grasses and food crops are starving for CO2 because it sits at nearly the lowest level it has ever been in the history of the Earth (barely above 400 ppm now, when it used to be over 7,000 ppm in the past).  Humans attempting to eliminate CO2 from the atmosphere is equivalent to some evil, fictional “plant demon” attempting to eliminate oxygen from the atmosphere, causing the mass asphyxiation of the entire human race. Just as eliminating oxygen is genocide against humans, eliminating carbon dioxide is genocide against plants."  http://naturalnews.com/2017-06-01-the-paris-climate-accord-is-genocide-against-plants-forests-and-life-planet.html   Targeting a substance vital to life on earth is not only unscientific it is irrational.

More insight into the climate change advocates illogical claim that CO2 is a dangerous pollutant.  Quote: "Keep in mind that the grand total of all the carbon dioxide from every source, natural as well as man-made, that is floating around in the “air” is less than half of one percent of the total.  What percentage of that less-than-half-a-percent do you suppose is produced by motor vehicles?  You may perhaps have noticed a pattern.  VW was crucified over the fractionally higher amounts of an actual pollutant – oxides of nitrogen (NOx) which are reactive and potentially harmful to people – emitted by its diesel engines.  It was implied that the amounts at issue were huge and catastrophic – “up to 40 times the legal maximum!” it was endlessly screeched. But in fact, the amounts were minuscule – of relevance only insofar as they were higher than an arbitrary government standard. There was no burden of proof upon the government to establish that, in fact, these fractionally  higher/minuscule increases in N0x emissions caused any harm to anyone.  It is the same – but much worse – with this carbon dioxide/“climate change” business.    https://www.theburningplatform.com/2017/06/03/a-pat-on-his-orange-head/

One of the climate change's favorite arguments for global warming is that the polar ice caps are melting.  According to NASA  not true.  Quote: "Nasa’s own data backs President Trump’s decision to pull out of the Paris climate agreement, despite the agency’s politicized leaders claiming otherwise. Additionally, recent Canadian Ice Service data shows Greenland ice nearing a  record high as Arctic sea ice extends over 300,000 square miles past its 2016 levels. “The useful idiots in the press who report on climate, continue to insist that the Arctic is melting down and nearing catastrophe,” wrote climate analyst Tony Heller. “In the actual Arctic, sea ice extent is normal and Greenland has gained a record amount of ice this winter.”  In 2015, a NASA study showed that Antarctic sheet ice was expanding, refuting claims by global warming advocates that polar ice would soon disappear."  And, "This further demonstrates that the global warming created by man is just a fraud to get more taxes,” reported Zero Hedge. “Scientists have looked over the logbooks of polar explorers Robert Falcon Scott and Ernest Shackleton from their expeditions during 1901-1904 and 1907-1909.”  “The theory that sea ice has declined post-1950 because of man cannot be supported.”

Additionally, the sun is reaching a solar minimum, which indicate the Earth is entering a global cooling phase, and perhaps even a mini ice age. “The longest minimum on record, the Maunder Minimum of 1645-1715, lasted an incredible 70 years,” reported the Global Warming Policy Forum. “It caused London’s River Thames to freeze over, and ‘frost fairs’ became popular.”  “This period of solar inactivity also corresponds to a climatic period called the ‘Little Ice Age’ when rivers that are normally ice-free froze and snow fields remained year-round at lower altitudes.”   https://www.infowars.com/nasa-data-proves-trump-right-to-exit-paris-climate-accord/

 

The fact is that climate science advocates have a terrible record of failed predictions based on their clearly flawed models.  Here are some examples. Quote: "The 1975 Newsweek article entitled “The Cooling World,” which claimed Earth’s temperature had been plunging for decades due to humanity’s activities, opens as follows: There are ominous signs that the Earth’s weather patterns have begun to change dramatically and that these changes may portend a drastic decline in food production — with serious political implications for just about every nation on Earth. The drop in food output could begin quite soon, perhaps only 10 years from now. The regions destined to feel its impact are the great wheat-producing lands of Canada and the U.S.S.R. in the North, along with a number of marginally self-sufficient tropical areas — parts of India, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Indochina and Indonesia — where the growing season is dependent upon the rains brought by the monsoon. The evidence in support of these predictions has now begun to accumulate so massively that meteor­ologists are hard-pressed to keep up with it. In England, farmers have seen their growing season decline by about two weeks since 1950, with a resultant overall loss in grain production estimated at up to 100,000 tons annually.

The article quotes dire statistics from the National Academy of Sciences, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration’s Center for Climatic and Environmental Assessment, Columbia University, and the University of Wisconsin at Madison to indicate how dire the global cooling was, and would be".  And, "Global warming — temperature predictions: Perhaps nowhere has the stunning failure of climate predictions been better illustrated than in the “climate models” used by the UN. The UN climate bureaucracy, known as the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), produces periodic reports on “climate science” — often dubbed the “Bible” of climatology. In its latest iteration, the Fifth Assessment Report (AR5), the UN featured 73 computer models and their predictions. All of them “predicted” varying degrees of increased warming as atmospheric concentrations of carbon dioxide (CO2) increased.  The problem is that every single model was wrong — by a lot. Not only did temperatures not rise by as much as the models predicted, they have failed to rise at all since around 1996, according to data collected by five official temperature data­sets. Based just on the laws of probability, a monkey rolling the dice would have done far better at predicting future temperatures than the UN’s models. That suggests deliberate fraud is likely at work." And, "On June 30, 1989, the Associated Press ran an article headlined: “UN Official Predicts Disaster, Says Greenhouse Effect Could Wipe Some Nations Off Map.” In the piece, the director of the UN Environment Programme’s (UNEP) New York office was quoted as claiming that “entire nations could be wiped off the face of the earth by rising sea levels if global warming is not reversed by the year 2000.” He also predicted “coastal flooding and crop failures” that “would create an exodus of ‘eco-refugees,’ threatening political chaos.” Of course, 2000 came and went, and none of those things actually happened. But that didn’t stop the warnings. In 2005, the UNEP warned that imminent sea-level rises, increased hurricanes, and desertification caused by AGW would lead to massive population disruptions. In a handy map, the organization highlighted areas that were supposed to be producing the most “climate refugees.” Especially at risk were regions such as the Caribbean and low-lying Pacific islands, along with coastal areas. The 2005 UNEP predictions claimed that, by 2010, some 50 million “climate refugees” would be fleeing those areas. However, not only did the areas in question fail to produce a single “climate refugee,” by 2010, population levels for those regions were still soaring. In many cases, the areas that were supposed to be producing waves of “climate refugees” and becoming uninhabitable turned out to be some of the fastest-growing places on Earth."     https://www.thenewamerican.com/tech/environment/item/22289-climate-alarmists-have-been-wrong-about-virtually-everything

The impacts of Trump's withdrawal impacts advocates in different ways, mostly it is a personal loss of one kind or another which is at play.  Quote: "The truth about the Paris Accord is that it was a scam from the outset, just like Kyoto.  I wrote on it at the time.  The fundamental scam is that it did not impose hard caps on the plurality of the population of the world — specifically, India and China.  Neither had hard caps nor requirements to spend.  India, for example, only had to make “reforms” if they were paid to do it by the Untied States and others.  Otherwise, no obligation.  China — same deal.  Of course India and China are the two most-populous nations.  Between them they’re over a third of the world’s count of people and India’s population continues to rapidly expand.  Both China and India will eventually start to see population declines, but not for a good long while, and in any event they’ll still be about a third of the planet by 2100.  Exempting either of these nations from any so-called “carbon limits” makes the entire exercise a joke."    https://www.theburningplatform.com/2017/06/02/caterwauls-on-paris/    This is another example.   https://beforeitsnews.com/u-s-politics/2017/06/end-of-the-world-absurd-overreactions-to-trumps-paris-decision-2528529.html

Let's take a quick look at the climate change delimma 1

President Trump created a firestorm with his announcement that he is pulling the United States out of the Paris Climate Change Agreement.  The political left along with a long list of other left leaning advocates within government, academia, industry and the media, including elements within other nations are up in arms as a consequence.  In this paper we will explore this decision and its real or potential  implications.

Here are the president's remarks revealing his decision to withdraw.    President Trump's full remarks at CFACT.org.

Here are examples of  reactions climate change advocates have rendered regarding Trump's action.    https://thefederalist.com/2017/06/01/15-top-reactions-trumps-withdrawal-paris-climate-deal/   As you peruse the comments you will find that little to no factual basis supporting their comments.  Their language invokes emotional reactions and denigrates the president rather than offering facts in defense of their positions.

Background.  Climate change has been around for thousands of years, some say even longer. However long the earth has been in existence scientists have established that climate change has been a recurring event and at times those events have been massive/catastrophic .  They  occurred long before man entered the scene and long before man had even a tiny ability to potentially impact global climate. Given what we know about past climate change the ability of human activity to influence such events is at best tenuous. It is a certainty that human activity had no ability to impact the earth's climate until the last 100 years or so.  To suggest that in this tiny bit of time as measured against the earth's long existence and recurrent climate changes that human activity is now an established contributor to what is a preposterous proposition.  It defies logic to believe human activity is now considered a contributor to changes which have occurred over many thousands of years or more. It should be obvious that claims that we now are prime movers in impacting the earth's climate grossly misrepresents factual history. Substantial evidence offers serious doubts as to the basis for such claims.  Efforts resulting from the Paris Accord are estimated  to reduce atmospheric C02 by .2 degrees over the next 30 years or so.  Is it a reasonable to believe the time, energy and recourses consumed to achieve such a miniscule difference will have any measurable impact?  Who decided that and on what basis?  Despite the apocalyptic claims by climate change advocates that something must be done the rationale for those claims are woefully inadequate. Common sense suggests a serious unemotional review is necessary.  Established facts coupled with the plethora of past failed climate change predictions do not evoke confidence that anyone has any idea how or what, or even if, humans have any capability to influence the mighty forces of nature. But we do know the consequential negative impacts such an undertaking will have on the economic health and welfare of people and nations across the globe.  Perhaps these and other reasons contributed to Trump's decision.    

I make no claim to special insights or scientific expertise.  The discussion offered is garnered from those having such insights and expertise.   I also admit to being a climate change skeptic.

History.

This cartoon depiction of what is known about climate changes throughout known history of earth provides a general understanding of what has happened over time.  https://xkcd.com/1732/   Climate change is a historical reality.  

This item depicts the history from a global warming perspective.   http://www.reuters.com/article/us-climate-history-idUSTRE7B02DA20111202  Although unproven the basis for these actions is the presumption that human activity contributes to global warming.  CO2 is targeted as a global warming contributor.  Providing funds to poor countries to "green" their economies is a proposed solution.

This item discusses the history of thinking that human activity influences the earth's climate.  Quote: "Dr. Ball has been a climatologist for more than forty years and was one of the earliest critics of the global warming hoax that was initiated by the United Nations environmental program that was established in 1972 and the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) established in 1988."  And, "CO2, despite being a minor element of the Earth’s atmosphere, is essential for all life on Earth because it is the food that nourishes all vegetation. The Earth has passed through many periods of high levels of CO2 and many cycles of warming and cooling that are part of the life of the planet.  “Science works by creating theories based on assumptions,” Dr. Ball notes, “then other scientists—performing their skeptical role—test them. The structure and mandate of the IPCC was in direct contradiction of this scientific method. They set out to prove the theory rather than disprove it.“The atmosphere,” Dr. Ball notes, “is three-dimensional and dynamic, so building a computer model that even approximates reality requires far more data than exists and much greater understanding of an extremely turbulent and complex system.” No computer model put forth by the IPCC in support of global warming has been accurate, nor ever could be. Most of the reports were created by a small group of men working within the Climate Research Unit (CRU) of the University of East Anglia and all were members of the IPCC. The result was “a totally false picture supposedly based on science.”  The revelations of emails between the members of the CRU were made available in 2009 by an unknown source. Dr. Ball quotes Phil Jones, the Director of the CRU at the time of the leaks, and Tom Wigley, a former director addressing other CRU members admitting that “Many of the uncertainties surrounding the cause of climate change will never be resolved because the necessary data are lacking.” The IPCC depended upon the public’s lack of knowledge regarding the science involved and the global warming hoax was greatly aided because the “mainstream media bought into and promoted the unproven theory. Scientists who challenged were denied funding and marginalized. National environmental policies were introduced based on the misleading information” of the IPCC summaries of their reports.  ” And, "At the heart of the hoax is a contempt for mankind and a belief that population worldwide should be reduced. The science advisor to President Obama, John Holdren, has advocated forced abortions, sterilization by introducing infertility drugs into the nation’s drinking water and food, and other totalitarian measures. “Overpopulation is still central to the use of climate change as a political vehicle,” warns Dr. Ball. Given that the environmental movement has been around since the 1960s, it has taken decades for the public to grasp its intent and the torrents of lies that have been used to advance it. “More people,” notes Dr. Ball, “are starting to understand that what they’re told about climate change by academia, the mass media, and the government is wrong, especially the propaganda coming from the UN and the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.”  “Ridiculous claims—like the science is settled or the debate is over—triggered a growing realization that something was wrong.”  When the global warming advocates began to tell people that cooling is caused by warming, the public has realized how absurd the entire UN climate change argument has been."   http://blog.heartland.org/2014/03/a-history-of-the-disastrous-global-warming-hoax/    There seems to be a political motive behind the climate change movement with government interests influencing the outcomes of government funded scientific research. 

During a news conference given in February 2015 by then Chairwoman of the UN's IPCC revealed the real purpose behind global warming/climate change initiatives.  Quote: "At a news conference last week in Brussels, Christiana Figueres, executive secretary of U.N.'s Framework Convention on Climate Change, admitted that the goal of environmental activists is not to save the world from ecological calamity but to destroy capitalism.  "This is the first time in the history of mankind that we are setting ourselves the task of intentionally, within a defined period of time, to change the economic development model that has been reigning for at least 150 years, since the Industrial Revolution," she said."    http://www.investors.com/politics/editorials/climate-change-scare-tool-to-destroy-capitalism/   

In March of 2016 former  United Nations climate official Ottmar Edenhofer said, "One has to free oneself from the illusion that international climate policy is environmental policy. This has almost nothing to do with the environmental policy anymore, with problems such as deforestation or the ozone hole," said Edenhofer, who co-chaired the U.N.'s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change working group on Mitigation of Climate Change from 2008 to 2015."  And, "We redistribute de facto the world's wealth by climate policy."   http://www.investors.com/politics/editorials/another-climate-alarmist-admits-real-motive-behind-warming-scare/  

Another Note Covering A Variety Of Topics 4

This item addresses the birth and seemingly the impending death of free speech (at least, ironically, at government supported education institutions).  Quote: "Mario Savio, the leader of the Free Speech Movement at Berkeley, was committed to free speech. But so was Berkeley at the time. In the years before Savio's movement, Berkeley had hosted speeches by Communists, Nazis (invited by leftists to cause a stir), and political and literary speakers of every stripe."  And, "Whatever legacy Savio has for the cause of free speech is dead, but this mindset lives on. The rioters and goons -- along with their pusillanimous enablers in the administration -- are carrying on this tradition. It is a tradition that says this is our sacred place and anyone not loyal to our faith must be resisted, rejected and renounced. All the talk of "hate speech" is clever marketing -- like the label the "Free Speech Movement" itself. What these petty, secular theocrats despise is heresy speech. And they will throw their bodies into the gears to silence it."    https://townhall.com/columnists/jonahgoldberg/2017/04/28/berkeley-didnt-birth-free-speech-but-seems-intent-to-bury-it-n2319295?  

This is a leftist oxymoronic action if ever there was one.  Quote: "“While this institution has maintained an atmosphere of civility and open debate, far too many campuses across America have become characterized by speech codes, safe zones, tone policing, administration-sanctioned political correctness — all of which amounts to nothing less than suppression of the freedom of speech,” he said. “These all-too-common practices are destructive of learning and the pursuit of knowledge, and they are wholly outside the America tradition.”  Compared to the way liberal protesters behave at campuses like UC Berkeley, the students who walked out on Pence were practically models of wonderful, adult behavior. But let’s not lower the bar so far that anyone who doesn’t actually riot gets to be praised for their rude, childish actions.  What the students at Notre Dame did was quite silly, and it only ruined their experience of what should have been a joyful occasion. And it’s a great lesson that you can sit and listen to someone you don’t agree with – you don’t have to stomp out and make a big show of yourself. No one cares what you think. You think you’re “doing something,” but you’re only making a fool of yourself."    http://www.restoreamericanglory.com/freedoms/we-support-free-speech-say-students-who-walked-out-on-mike-pence/

These students don't seem to understand how ridiculous and hypocritical they really are.  They walked out of VP Pense's speech yet claim they support free speech.  To them free speech means only that with which they agree.  It is truly unfortunate but that is increasingly the leftist way.   http://www.restoreamericanglory.com/freedoms/we-support-free-speech-say-students-who-walked-out-on-mike-pence/

A few other items.

If you do not believe the government bureaucratic deep state components and private donations from leftist operations funded by George Soros and others are actively seeking to undermine our republic, perhaps this piece will disabuse you of that notion.  Quote: "A prominent liberal activist group that is closely involved with anti-Trump campaigns has been awarded more than $20 million in taxpayer-funded government grants since 2002, according to a review of the organization's Form 990s.  Make the Road New York (MRNY), a New York City-based Latino immigrant group with 19,000 dues-paying members, has been actively involved with anti-Trump campaigns and is closely linked to an organization that is spearheading a new $80 million anti-Trump network that will span across 32 states. In addition to generous funding from liberal billionaire George Soros, MRNY has hauled in millions in government grants".    http://freebeacon.com/issues/anti-trump-group-received-more-than-20-million-in-government-grants/?

If this is an example of an exalted Democrat I want no part of them.    https://thehornnews.com/maxine-waters-screaming-fit-meltdown-video/    She in not the only example of a Democrat exhibiting such behavior.  And this piece takes the matter even further.

This woman proved once again that she thinks she is perfect and whenever she fails it is someone else's fault.  And the Democrats actually wanted her to win. As always everything is about her and her unbounded ego.  The fact is she was and remains a disaster and if the Democrats have any hope of improving future chances they need to tell her to stop whining and just go away.  After delivering a blistering hit on the DNC, an interviewer "... was responding to Clinton's speech on Wednesday, when she said the DNC gave her "nothing" when it came to data once she won the Democratic nomination.  "I get the nomination, so I'm now the nominee of the Democratic Party," she said. "I inherit nothing from the Democratic Party. I mean, it was bankrupt. It was on the verge of insolvency. Its data was mediocre to poor, non-existent, wrong. I had to inject money into it."  It was just one of several comments Clinton made aimed at blaming others for her loss. Clinton blamed the press for covering her email scandal "like it was Pearl Harbor."  She blamed Trump and Russia for deep levels of coordination that she said cost her the White House.  Clinton also suggested Democrats may have to start lying in future elections in order to defeat Republicans. http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/former-dnc-data-director-clintons-complaint-is-f-king-bulls-t/article/2624644  That last barb was classic.  The Democrat party lied about all manner of things throughout her entire campaign. The fact is they always do.  The party is morally and ethically bankrupt.  Here's more of what Hillary had to say.  I am beginning to think she is mentally unstable.

Adding to thoughts on Hillary's mental health, consider this item.  She claims that her email scandal was trivial.  She knows that is a lie.  People are currently in jail for mishandling classified documents at a vastly lower level than she did.  At one point in time while in the military, I was custodian of 10 safes containing classified information up to Secret. If I had simply left one of those safes unlocked at the end of the day I would have committed a punishable crime.  Hillary did far, far worse over a period of at least four years.  One reason I think former FBI Director Comey was fired is that she got off scot free while others guilty of far less rot in jail. What General Petraus did was far less serious. While he got a relatively light sentence he was at least punished.  Failure to charge her with a series of serious felonies was one of the most egregious miscarriages of justice I have ever seen.  The leftist political machine from Obama on down kept her out of jail.  For that they should serve time. Her constant lies and cavalier attitude about her serious crimes makes me sick.   http://www.libertynewsnow.com/clinton-dismisses-email-scandal-investigation-nothing-significant/article7218

It would a really good thing if the political left would recognize the blatantly obvious truth laid out here.  Quote: "Racism is only racism if it comes from groups the left hates."   https://townhall.com/columnists/benshapiro/2017/05/10/racism-is-only-racism-if-comes-from-groups-the-left-hates-n2324366? 

It is impossible to not detect the odor of corruption this item reviews.  Yet the mainstream media ignores it and instead focuses on made up fake charges against Trump.  Read the article and tell me which of the two November 2016 presidential candidates had a favorable relationship with the Russians.  https://www.nytimes.com/2015/04/24/us/cash-flowed-to-clinton-foundation-as-russians-pressed-for-control-of-uranium-company.html?    

  

This is an item which shows how the government is under the thumb of their big business croneys.  The H1b visa program ostensibly is in support of filling highly technical jobs industry cannot find in the American market place.  Facts prove instead that business uses this government perk to lower their employee costs, not because they cannot fine qualified US citizen candidates.  Quote: "The federal H1b program is intended to allow foreign workers into the US to do high-skill jobs for which employers can’t find qualified domestic workers. In reality, it’s a way for US employers to lower their labor costs, ignoring the large pool of fully qualified (but more expensive) US workers in favor of cheap foreign labor. This isn’t a small program, either; in 2014 there were 124,326 new applications approved and 191,531 renewed. Since this is a three-year program with one possible renewal, the total number of H1b foreign workers in the US is triple that, or close to a million lower-wage workers in positions that should otherwise go to US workers at much higher wages."    https://www.theburningplatform.com/2017/05/15/the-h1b-scam/    Any government program that benefits big business and foreigners at the expense of American citizens should be halted forthwith. 

Even elite Democrats are now saying the obvious.  Obama's presidency was a terrible failure.  Quote: "It’s a unique and nearly unprecedented day when a Democrat admits fault within their own party — but it just happened. Massachusetts Sen. Elizabeth Warren displayed a rare grasp of reality Monday, when she acknowledged former President Barack Obama’s failures as commander-in-chief.  In an interview with The Guardian, Warren slammed Obama for misreporting the successes of his administration and exaggerating statistics to fit his agenda of securing his legacy."   https://thehornnews.com/elizabeth-warren-admits-obama-terrible/

Despite all the negativity emanating out of DC some good things are happening.  This piece explains. Quote: "Over a few months, lawmakers used an obscure legislative rule to ram through changes that will have far-reaching implications for the coal industry, broadband customers, hunters and women seeking health care at Planned Parenthood and other abortion providers.  The deadline for scuttling the rules that Democrat Obama imposed during his final months in office was last Thursday. The 1996 Congressional Review Act had given Republicans the power to make the changes with a simple majority, within a set time.  While the rest of Washington focused on the furor over President Donald Trump’s firing of FBI Director James Comey, Republicans were celebrating their effort to reverse the rules, arguing that it would boost the economy and make it easier for businesses to operate."     https://thehornnews.com/gop-destroys-obamas-legacy-major-regulation-reversals/  

To end this piece here is a brief revisit of the content found in the opening topic.  It is interesting how rich leftist billionaires talk about spending other people's money to promote equality of income.  It is also interesting how many of these same people are left leaning socialists who express the desire to control the masses who in comparison have little to nothing.  Being rich gives one the time and resources to ponder about what are historically proved unattainable utopian ideals...  Meanwhile the masses have little time at day's end for such thoughts.  They are too busy simply trying to stay ahead of government mandates and their resulting consequences and of course the tax man.   Quote: "In 2015, Mark Zuckerberg claimed he would give his entire fortune away to charity in his lifetime, and promptly formed an LLC for that purpose… as opposed to, you know, a charity. This means that instead of using his own money to help people, he can spend that money on lobbying politicians in Washington to use YOUR money to help people. See how generous these rich philanthropists are with everyone else’s money?  No, I guess true charity is the responsibility of the rest of us."   https://www.theburningplatform.com/2017/05/27/the-real-reason-zuckerberg-supports-a-universal-basic-income/ 

George Burns

Another Note Covering A Variety Of Topics 3

US Pediatricians get it!!!  We need to listen to them and definitely not to liberal secular progressive pontificators of unadulturated nonsense.  The political left is abusing children with its misguided, ill-informed, unscientific and most unhealthy obsession with deviant sexual matters.  Quote: "Recently the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) published an excerpt, in their AAP Daily Briefing, from a study in the April Journal of Experimental Psychology. The study reported that children under the age of 14 are not cognitively capable of crossing a busy street “because children lack the perceptual judgment and physical skills needed to consistently get across safely.” This same AAP, however, also frequently promotes the claim that children this age or younger are cognitively capable of deciding that they are the wrong sex. Moreover, the AAP also deems children cognitively competent to consent to puberty blockers, toxic sex hormones and mutilating sex reassignment surgery. Cognitive immaturity and impaired risk assessment during adolescence has always been recognized. That’s why society has long had age restrictions not only for consenting to medical procedures, but also for driving, voting, joining the military, and purchasing alcohol and cigarettes. Dr. Cretella, President of the American College of Pediatricians states, Children are not miniature adults. Everyone knows this. Our position statement, The Teenage Brain: Under Construction, documents the cognitive limitations of adolescents that compromise their ability to provide informed consent."    https://www.lifesitenews.com/pulse/consenting-to-sex-change-easier-than-crossing-street? 

The left's Antifa terrorist organization is apparently linked to sexual predators, specifically pedophiles.   You will not find this item to be a pleasant read.  But, it does speak to the moral decay of the political left.  Quote: "Militant “Antifa” leftists responsible for organizing the riots in Berkeley have been tied to NAMBLA, a notorious pedophile group whose name is an acronym for “North American Man/Boy Love Association”. The Antifa group — known as the Coalition to Defend Affirmative Action, Integration & Immigrant Rights, and Fight for Equality By Any Means Necessary (BAMN) — has been linked to anti-Republican violence that rocked Berkeley several times this year (“By Any Means Necessary” is Sartre quote that was famously invoked by Malcolm X in a call for racial violence). BAMN’s efforts led to the riots at UC Berkeley against the alt-right provocateur Milo Yiannopoulos. Earlier this month, BAMN’s plans to disrupt conservative writer Ann Coulter’s speech at UC Berkeley caused its cancellation over safety concerns."    https://heatst.com/politics/militant-antifa-activists-have-deep-ties-to-notorious-nambla-pedophiles/  

This item extends the previous five items. It is nefarious activities like these that make fighting perverse LBGT initiatives a societal and legal imperative.  LBGT advocates are seeking to establish a legal environment wherein children are encouraged to determine their sexual orientation.  This type activity is in itself a form of sexual perversion and should never ever be allowed to pollute impressionable minds.   https://www.lifesitenews.com/opinion/lgbt-bill-to-allow-children-to-consent-to-psychiatric-therapy-is-stopped-in?   Thankfully, this effort in Colorado ultimately failed.  But it is a certainty that their search for ways to promote perversion will continue unabated.

Another negative consequence of Obama's and the political left's irresponsible obsession with sexual perversion.  Quote: "WND reported several students, represented by the Alliance Defending Freedom and the Independence Law Center, brought a case against Supt. Richard Faidley and others for allowing both boys and girls to change and shower in the same room under the guise of accommodating “gender orientation.”  The claim was triggered when a high school student identified only as Joel Doe “was exposed involuntarily to an undressed female student while he was changing in his school’s locker room.” Several other students were added to the case. The lawsuit charges that without any notice to students or their parents, school officials “secretly opened” their sex-specific restrooms and locker rooms to students of the opposite sex. The original plaintiff reported he was standing in his underwear about to put on his gym clothes when he suddenly noticed that a female student, also in a state of undress, was in the locker room."    http://www.wnd.com/2017/05/school-sued-for-coed-showers-suddenly-concerned-about-privacy/  

This piece points out the idiocy of claiming abortion is a woman's right.  It is in fact a consequence of the over sexualization of America by the political left.  Permissive and repeated access to abortion is just another form of birth control.  The fact is that permissive abortions makes murder okay but only if you are a pregnant woman.  Quote: "Such comments not only grossly exaggerate the practical consequences of accommodating religious objections to the contraceptive mandate; they fundamentally misconstrue the interests at stake, erroneously equating freedom from coercion with a claim on other people's resources.  The "basic right to prevent pregnancy" does not imply a right to free contraception any more than the right to freedom of speech implies a right to free internet service or the right to armed self-defense implies a right to free guns. A system in which you can force other people to subsidize your choices, even when it means violating their religious convictions, looks a lot more like tyranny than freedom."   https://townhall.com/columnists/jacobsullum/2017/05/10/the-tyranny-of-reproductive-freedom-n2324468?    I don't understand the absence of responsibility and accountability which would result in use of a number of perfectly effective means to avoid pregnancy.  Abortion is far too often the chosen method of birth control.  The fact is that in most cases it is not about a woman's right to choose.  I recently read a piece about a woman who went to get her ninth abortion but was shocked when seeing the ultrasound that unlike the piece of tissue Planned Parenthood said she was aborting it was in fact a living baby, a human being.  The consequence of deception and total dishonesty of abortion advocates is the willful destruction of human life.  Or, more rightly said, "murder".

And this item may cause some people to change their mind about the goodness, honesty and ethics of Planned Parenthood.    Quote: "After having their videos blocked by the courts for some time, the undercover journalists at the Center for Medical Progress are releasing new tapes of Planned Parenthood executives speaking frankly about their practices – and they are as gruesome and disgusting as anything CMP has released in the past.  On Thursday, the group published online a three-minute video recorded at a recent National Abortion Federation meeting, a preview of content yet to come. In the video, Planned Parenthood senior director Deborah Nucatola is seen describing how the organization will change abortion procedures while performing them so they can extract as many intact fetal organs as possible for later “donation.”  “You know, sometimes she’ll tell me she wants brain,” Nucatola said in the video. “And we’ll leave the calvarium till last and then try to basically take it – or, actually catch everything – and even keep it separate from the rest of the tissue so it doesn’t get lost.”  Astute viewers will recognize that Nucatola is actually describing the process of beheading the fetus so the sensitive brain tissue can remain unharmed and intact.  At another point in the video, a Planned Parenthood executive named Deb VanDerhei admits that some affiliated clinics cannot resist the temptation to sell fetal tissue to research clinics.  “The truth is that some might want to do it to increase their revenues,” she said. “And we can’t stop them.”

Wait, hasn’t Planned Parenthood been saying this entire time that they NEVER engage in that kind of illegal sale?"     http://www.fixthisnation.com/conservative-breaking-news/brand-new-sickening-video-exposes-truth-about-planned-parenthood/

Free Speech is under attack.

Free speech is under assault by the political left.  Quote: "The totalitarian left is emboldened by its selective suppression of speech. Just as scary is the deluded thought process that inspires its Stalinism.  Recognizing its inability to compete in the marketplace of ideas, the left has been chipping away for years at the concept of free speech. You have to give leftists points for cleverness, not to mention persistence, because they don't openly advocate censoring conservative speech as such. They pretend to be protecting some greater good or preventing imminent harm to certain groups.  When they failed in talk radio, they resurrected the Fairness Doctrine, which is euphemistically disguised as a policy to ensure the presentation of all viewpoints but is actually a sinister ploy to dilute the power of conservative talk. They always have some excuse -- and plausible deniability."   And, "I urge you not to miss the most stunning aspect of Baer's specious analysis. The thrust of the left's message against conservatives across the board is that because of our toxic ideas, we should be discredited and delegitimized "as less worthy of participation in the public exchange of ideas."  Just as leftists support the commission of violence in the name of preventing speech that could arguably lead to it, they would muzzle us because through our speech, we would discredit and then effectively muzzle them. Insanity. We don't want to muzzle liberals; we want to defeat them in the marketplace of ideas. We don't want to commit violence against them, but they often want to do so against us. Boy, how they project."    https://townhall.com/columnists/davidlimbaugh/2017/04/28/liberal-thought-police-getting-scarier-n2319367?

Loss of free speech is something many of us have suffered. It is a real phenomenon and is the product of leftist policies and tactics.  This item provides the details.  Quote: "Despite freedom of speech being one of the first points within the Constitution, the liberal left is finding ways to silence conservative speakers, hosts and celebrities through intimidation tactics. Intimidation as a tactic to prevent someone from spreading information is nothing new. The practice has more or less been around since humans were living in caves. When watching animals in a local zoo or on nature shows, certain creatures will attempt to intimidate others in order to gain what it wants. One would think humans have risen above acting like a dog or a spider, but Democrats have proven this simply is not the case. That is why there are groups within the Democratic Party using tactics designed specifically to shut the mouths of conservatives, even if what a Republican is saying is true."    http://patrioticviralnews.com/articles/the-dark-art-of-political-intimidation/    More,  https://townhall.com/columnists/pauljacob/2017/05/07/progressively-losing-freedom-n2323314?

Another leftist effort to kill free speech. Quote: "The Left has caused this problem and they have to cure it or it will be the death of the university system in the U.S. Parents need to start demanding that schools enforce free speech and not in restricted areas. The federal government needs to assert the power of the purse to withhold funds from universities that abuse the First Amendment and do not protect the free speech of all people on campus. Almost all parents are hogtied by the Left’s control over the educational system. They are afraid their little darlings will not get into the right school and get the right degree. They are not considering what their children will become after they spend their $100,000 to $200,000. This dangerous behavior is spreading outside college campuses as a parade was cancelled in Portland when someone called and threatened violence against Republicans marching in a civic parade about roses."     https://townhall.com/columnists/brucebialosky/2017/05/07/a-free-speech-tipping-point-n2321732?

Another Note Covering A Variety Of Topics 2

This is another accounting of the lessons that the recent collapsing of Venezuala teaches.  Socialism/leftism does not work, never has.  As Margaret Thatcher once said and I paraphrase, "Socialism does not work because the socialists eventually run out of other people"s money." This is a sad story. Quote: "Venezuela is a naturally rich nation. It’s ranked seventh worldwide for biodiversity and has the world’s largest reserves of oil. This is a country that deserves, more than most, to thrive. However, as in all countries, it passes through economic cycles and, when on a downward curve, would-be leaders take the opportunity to claim that the “greedy rich” have sent the economy into a tailspin (which can sometimes be the case) and that the solution is to adopt a collectivist approach to governance."    https://www.theburningplatform.com/2017/04/29/selling-the-golden-goose/   

This item lays bare the truth and nothing but of the deceptions that lure people into socialism and its subsequent internal corruptive components which always leads to national collapse and great suffering of the masses.  Quote: "Socialism is about forced redistribution of wealth from those who have sacrificed, worked hard, and risked their own resources, to those who have need of resources beyond that which they have personally earned. It is simply government-mandated theft. It breeds resentment in those whose income has been stolen, and it breeds entitlement and dependence in those who are recipients of income they have not earned. It also perversely incentivizes individuals to invest their efforts in pursuing a position of "need" as opposed to investing time in education, training, and labor so as to obtain income."  And, "A problem that was created by government interference and intervention cannot be fixed by injecting more government interference and intervention.  ObamaCare is predictably making things worse. Although we were told it would reduce insurance premiums, the exact opposite has occurred, and health insurance premiums continue to increase dramatically. Such inconvenient truths are often met with tired and worn socialist apologetics to the effect that some people may have to accept higher insurance premiums, but it probably will only affect wealthier individuals who can afford to pay more, and thus it is consistent with redistributive justice. Now that physicians have essentially become beaten-down hostages of an oppressive government/third-party payment system, why, some wonder, is it taking so long to break the backs of independent physicians?"      http://www.jpands.org/vol18no3/huntoon.pdf  

Quote: "Violence and intimidation against Republicans are quickly becoming the new normal in an increasingly tense political climate.  In one of the most recent incidents, police in Tennessee charged a woman with felony reckless endangerment on Thursday for allegedly trying to run Republican Congressman David Kustoff off the road after a town hall. The woman, Wendi Wright, was reportedly enraged over Kustoff’s support for the American Health Care Act and screamed at the congressman and his aide, striking his car windows and reaching inside the vehicle."    http://dailycaller.com/2017/05/14/violence-and-intimidation-against-republicans-are-becoming-the-new-normal/    By their silence Democrat leaders, including Obama and Hillary, are condoning this spike in violence against Republicans.  This has long been a tactic of leftists seeking to destabilize a nation's political structure and impose their tyrannical rule. 

This item deals with the intellectual void that is the religion of atheism.  The author equates atheism with progressivism.  Quote: "To be clear, I’m not a believer." and, "I don’t know if the Christians are right about a God in heaven, but I don’t know they are wrong either. I don’t know. I can’t know." and, "I do know I’d never want to live in a world ruled by atheists."         https://www.theburningplatform.com/2017/06/01/on-atheism/

This expands the conversation to include cultural Marxism.  Quote: "A word Cultural Marxists use a lot lately is diversity. “We’ve got to have diversity.” No, we don’t have to have diversity. There’s zero logical or moral reason why every room should have a quota of blacks, Hispanics, LGBTs, women, or whatever. It’s extremely stupid to have people qualify for something based upon accidental characteristics. It encourages them to view themselves not as individuals, but members of a group. So it actually foments class warfare."   https://www.theburningplatform.com/2017/05/13/doug-casey-on-the-plague-of-cultural-marxists/#more-150163

Regarding the political left's obsession with sexual matters.

Regarding the left's obsession with sexual matters introduced by cultural Marxism it is interesting to note that Bill Nye, the left's ill informed science guy, has added ill-informed sexual smut to his list of leftist advocacy causes.  This is truly sickening.   Quote: "The "moral" of Nye's busybody message is that monogamous heterosexual sex is unnatural, immoral and boring. He is pressuring and lecturing people to get with it,  to cast off the chains of their unnatural parochial sexuality and embrace an unhealthy and destructive lifestyle. What is so appalling about this is that Nye is cloaking himself in the robe of science and hoping to transmit this message to our children -- to tell our children that it is anti-science to embrace a heterosexual and monogamous relationship, that true happiness can only be found in sexual perversion. There is only word for that: demonic."    http://www.dailywire.com/news/15962/bill-nyes-ice-cream-cartoon-condemns-monogamous-john-nolte?    He must be a real embarrassment to real scientists.  

Science tells us a completely different story about transgenders than they and the liberal left does.  Wonder who is right?   Quote: "Transgender activists have simultaneously detached gender completely from sex and suggested that men can magically become "real women" by merely "identifying" as female, and vise-versa. This is untrue, of course. A new study composed by Weizmann Institute of Science researchers just widened the hole in the transgender narrative pushed by progressives: it has been found that the two sexes express over 6,500 genes differently, adding to the already major biological differences between men and women."  And, "Still, the many intricate biological differences between men and women, such as the ones expressed by Weizmann Institute researchers, will be said by progressives to be simply overridden by one's feelings."     http://www.dailywire.com/news/16108/transgender-agenda-fail-scientists-say-there-are-amanda-prestigiacomo?   Looks like science tops by a long shot  the "this is how I feel" claim invented by the political left.  But as the piece notes facts mean little to progressives.  To them feelings trump facts.  No wonder they are so wrong on matters of importance most of the time. 

This is just one more of the unintended consequences of far too many poorly thought out progressive/liberal/Democrat policies.   Quote: " France, Sweden, Germany and other European nations are on a path to legalize rape committed by migrants because it’s “their culture.” As shocking as this might seem, a recent number of rapists who avoided severe punishment suggests there’s a precedent already in place to decriminalize rapes by migrants because they don’t “culturally understand” Western rape laws or even the word “no.”  In short, rapes by migrants are downplayed as “cultural misunderstandings” and thus the victims never receive justice, meaning that “de facto” rape legalization is, for the most part, already in place. For example, a German judge recently acquitted a Turkish drug dealer of rape despite believing “every word” of the 23-year-old victim’s accusation because, according to the judge, what the victim “had experienced as rape,” including having her head shoved between two bed posts after she said no, might be “culturally” considered “wild sex” in Turkey.  “The prosecutor admitted that the acquittal must have been a heavy blow to the victim,” reported the Märkische Allegemeine, translated from German.  “On the other hand a conviction was not possible because there was no demonstrated intent of rape [by the accused.]”    http://www.libertyheadlines.com/rape-legalization-migrants-gains-ground-europe/?   Although going this direction does fit within the absence of respect liberals/progressives have for abiding the law.

Another Note Covering A Variety Of Topics 1

Thoughts about the consequences of socialism and the political left.

This item provides a synopsis of history that most modern day thinkers do not care about, ignore, revise, or dismiss as irrelevant.  It validates the abject failures of modern day people who choose to ignore facts and participate in fantasies of their own making or following the ever changing intellectual fads of the day.  The mistakes being made are enormous and are at the root of most of today's trials and tribulations.  Quote: "In today’s irreligious and indeed antireligious climate the fashion is to dismiss Christianity as crude superstition, and to babble wisely about the separation of church and state. This is unfortunate, and stupid, since Christianity was the heart and soul of as yet the greatest civilization the world has seen. Those who know nothing of it cannot understand the last two thousand years and how our world came to be."  And, "The future? Christianity seems to be dying out. A resurgence is hard to imagine. It simply isn’t suited to the modern world. The Old Testament in particular is ugly and immoral and its magical events I suspect are too much for the modern mind. Islam, being fanatical and primitive, will presumably survive for a while in its own lands. The mental night that is Islam can be seen in virtually everything, from schooling to commerce and is attributable to a religious hostility to modernity. From The Closing, mentioned above: “In comparison the number of patents registered in the twenty-year period from 1980 to 2000, the report shows Korea with 16328 and nine countries in the Middle East, including Egypt, Syria, and Jordan, with 370, with even many of these patents registered by foreigners.” Judaism? Materialist in the philosophical sense and not requiring its adherents to believe things apparently impossible, it would seem better adapted to modernity. It imposes no restrictions on its adherents in science, culture, or commerce.  But Christendom was a hell of a show while it lasted."    https://www.theburningplatform.com/2017/04/28/the-place-of-christianity-in-history-a-view-from-without/

This item discusses what the author believes is at least one of the main legacies Karl Marx left us, "anti-intellectualism". Quote: "They learned them from Marx. Thomas Sowell put it this way in his 1985 book, Marxism: Philosophy and Economics: Much of the intellectual legacy of Marx is an anti-intellectual legacy. It has been said that you cannot refute a sneer. Marxism has taught many – inside and outside its ranks – to sneer at capitalism, at inconvenient facts or contrary interpretations, and thus to sneer at the intellectual process itself. This has been one of the sources of its enduring strength as a political doctrine, and as a means of acquiring and using political power in unbridled ways."  This acquisition and use of power was not innocuous. Marx famously wrote that “the philosophers have only interpreted the world, in various ways; the point is to change it.” Change it Marx and his followers did, and not for the better. Societies built on Marxist ideals were and are murder machines, and even when people aren’t lined up and shot for their opposition to various revolutions, they are made to “leap forward” and are ultimately starved to death. The body count from communist regimes – reaching into the tens of millions – is Marx’s intellectual and political legacy. Would that he and his followers had been more open to the possibility that they might be wrong."     https://fee.org/articles/marxs-legacy-is-anti-intellectualism/?

This item details one of the many reasons why Socialistic states always fail.  Quote: "Socialism, as my New Orleans questioner implied, is often assumed to be moral. Is that assumption justified?  Socialism is a utopian ideal intended to solve all of humanity’s problems including, above all, poverty and inequality. The theory and practice, alas, have tended to be at odds with one another.  Here is how Karl Marx outlined the future benefits of a socialist society:  “If we have chosen the position in life in which we can most of all work for mankind, no burdens can bow us down, because they are sacrifices for the benefit of all; then we shall experience no petty, limited, selfish joy, but our happiness will belong to millions, our deeds will live on quietly but perpetually at work, and over our ashes will be shed the hot tears of noble people.” How has that "noble" idea worked out everywhere it has been forced upon the people?  Another quote: "Applying socialist ideas in practice turned out to be much more problematic. One of the most obvious shortcomings of socialism in real life is its tendency to lead toward dictatorship. This relationship, clearly visible in Venezuela today, was first identified by the Nobel Prize-winning economist Friedrich Hayek in The Road to Serfdom.  In 1944, when he wrote his book, Hayek noted that the crimes of the German National Socialists and Soviet Communists were, in great part, the result of growing state control over the economy.   As he explained, growing state interference in the economy leads to massive inefficiencies and long queues outside empty shops. A state of perpetual economic crisis then leads to calls for more planning."   https://fee.org/articles/under-socialism-morality-is-scarcer-than-bread/?   The truth is that our political leftist have slowly but surely for many years inflicted historically provable failed socialistic ideas on us and our country.

This item provides good rationale explaining the reasons why and how the political left is shutting down freedom of speech.  Quote: "First of all, when I talk about the so-called political Left, I’m talking about people who are firmly in the Globalist camp. They may not know they are, but they are. The Globalists work through various versions of socialism and quasi-socialism and Communism and Marxism and “free the people” and all sorts of other slogans and guiding ideas. These political philosophies and strategies have nothing to do with Globalism per se—they’re just provisional tactics Globalists use to gain power, because power is the goal. Their system is top-heavy control under a variety of names and deceptions. That’s just the way it is. The Globalists are run by crony capitalists at the top who stole their way to riches and then turned around and decided to limit the game, so they would remain in charge. Their approach is to appear humane. It’s a lie. Their goal is straightforward: they want to make the planet one nation, which they operate like a machine. The stand for The Machine, and against life. The political Left, at ground level, is clueless about all of this. They’re sucked in by the humane propaganda. They look to a utopia where nobody has to work or earn money. Many of these ground troops are hoping and dreaming about that day because they’re convinced they can’t make it in an open market. That, too, is just the way it is. Now they’re emboldened to shut down free speech, meaning speech and language and words and ideas they don’t like, because… They’re finding out they can. That’s the simple answer. They can. It gives them a sense of power they haven’t felt. They can do “big things.” They can riot and throw bricks through store windows and shut down campus speeches and whine and cry about trigger words and safe spaces and get away with it. They can have an impact. They’ve never experienced that before."    https://jonrappoport.wordpress.com/2017/05/15/why-the-political-left-feels-emboldened-to-shut-down-free-speech/ 

This is what needs to be learned from the Venezuela's fateful experiment. Quote: "In a capitalist economy, nobody sets the prices of goods and services (unless, of course, one considers heavily regulated parts of the economy such as the American healthcare system under Obamacare). Prices emerge “spontaneously”, depending on supply and demand. Socialist countries, in contrast, employ thousands of bureaucrats who try to estimate future supply and demand, and incorporate those estimates into Soviet five-year plans. By Khrushchev’s time, it was clear that Soviet “plans” were not worth the paper they were scribbled on. The failure of central planning explained both the shortages of basic goods in the USSR and the need for an independent and capitalist Switzerland. Conversely, it is useful for people in free-market democracies to be constantly reminded of the consequences of alternative economic and political arrangements, such as those in contemporary Venezuela. The country’s attempt to build 21^st-century socialism has run into predictable problems, including rising infant mortality rates, triple-digit inflation, widespread food shortages, a collapsing healthcare system and failing rule of law, and the growing repression of the opposition by the state."     https://fee.org/articles/what-venezuela-can-teach-young-socialists/?

Why is it that the mainstream media never ever tells the truth about the troubles in Venezuela?  Quote: " If you want a simple test to determine if a news source is in the fake news business, examine what they write about Venezuela. If they write about the mass starvation, riots, and shortages with no mention of socialism’s role in the disaster, then you know they are fake news providers.  The fate of Venezuela, which has the largest oil reserves in the world, ought to be the final lesson conclusively proving that socialism is a delusion that impoverishes those it purports to help.  An entire nation is starving, unable to feed itself, generate enough electricity, or produce toilet paper. In the midst of boundless opportunity, its economy is grinding to a halt because  of socialism." http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2017/05/american_media_hiding_socialisms_devastation_of_venezuela_.html   Yet our leftist friends seem determined to bring that very same travesty to our country.