green on the outside but RED on the INSIDE.You get what you vote for....or for not voting.
Since the 70s when the Soviets introduced the green party in Germany, the left commies have driven the ‘green’ agenda to destroy capitalism
green on the outside but RED on the INSIDE.The Green Sector radicals.
Think Solyent Green.
They hate deniers who in turn hate clean air and clean water. Freakin’ idiots.
I don’t need to wake up, I’ve seen State (New York) contracts with “bird houses” to the tune of $250 a pop. Not eagles, not falcons, ...but common birds.
That’s one hell of a bird house!
It's a Gordian knot that needs to be axed.
Dude, it’s Sustanibility! Like - no economic growth man! Kinda cool huh?
George Will, the syndicated columnist and political commentator, responded to a question about climate change the other day with this take:
“The whole point of global warming is it’s a rationalization for progressives to do what progressives want to do, which is concentrate more and more power in Washington, more and more Washington power in the executive branch, more and more executive branch power in independent czars and agencies, to micromanage the lives of the American people. Our shower heads, our toilets, our bathtubs, our garden hoses — everything becomes involved in the exigencies of rescuing the planet.”
Got that?
Too late. It is as indestructible as political correctness.
Watch out for the "sustainability" buzz word. It flies in the face of God's abundant resource- and energy-rich creation and presumes lack with no proof except agenda-driven "science" so-called. "Sustainability" will be their excuse and justification for taking away your freedoms.
It's all going to come down at some point, but there may enough of us to keep it at bay for a few more decades.
Good post!
If anyone wants to read about government eco-fascists and their sedition and treason, check out Rapanos v US.
In a nutshell, the Nazis at EPA refused to be bound by previous USSC rulings and went ahead and tried to destroy a landowner in Michigan.
The EPA Nazis engaged in theft and outright extortion and refused to obey the US courts and the US Congress. The US Congress, under George Bush, refused to hold hearings to indict and imprison the EPA Nazis.
It’s becoming clear to me that if we want to restrain the Nazi federal bureaucrat goons, the task will fall to 100 million armed Americans.
“... the White House announcement that the Keystone XL pipeline won’t be built for at least six more months.”
The writer of the article is naïve. Keystone will never be ok’d under Barack the Undeniable. With this 6 month delay, pray tell what incentive is there for him to ok it during his remaining two years? For the unions? It’s not like Obama cares about anyone other than himself - not unions, not democrats, not even his family. He cares about Barack the Undeniable...PERIOD.
With three accidents (derailment and fire) being presented to the public as "explosions" and the Bakken crude oil being described as "highly explosive", in an attempt to make it the equivalent of "assault" oil in the public mind, the race is on to terrify the public into lining children up next to rail lines in protest, complete with mass-produced hand-drawn signs with pictures of fire and cataclysm.
It's coming.
First, the description of rail accidents as "explosion" or "explosion and derailment" or even "explosion and spill" is relevant, because in each instance, the derailment preceded the fire and/or explosion, if there was one, not the other way around.
Why is the different order significant?
Consider that if a plane crash was described as an explosion and crash, the assumption would be that the explosion led to the crash, and not the other way around: that the plane had exploded in the air. If it is described as a crash and explosion, the mind connects the dots to view the crash coming first, leading to the explosion second.
When rail accidents are presented as a fire/explosion and derailment, in that order, it gives the impression that the train blew up or caught fire and then derailed, instead of the more accurate description of a train derailing first, then the ruptured rail car cargo catching fire.
It also gives the impression that the blame for any disaster (should there be one) belongs on the cargo for exploding, not other forces or incidents for subjecting the railcar and contents to a train wreck.
Second, while the attempt to demonize the production technique known as "fracking" has had less than complete success at demonizing the industry (or providing sound reasons to shut the industry down), it heralded the search for a buzzword or catchphrase the media could use to evoke the same knee-jerk reactions the media get with terms like 'high powered' and 'assault weapon' among the fans of gun control laws.
It is the buzzword or series of buzzwords the media use to gain almost Pavlovian control over the involuntary reactions of the low-information set, from involuntary profanity, wailing, gnashing of teeth, to unfriending people on Facebook, generally running in circles and demanding that extra Constitutional powers be invented and invoked to counter the 'immediate and evil threat of "_________________" (fill in the blank with the threat du jour).
The attempt to find such a buzzword continues, even to the extent of referring to oil as having been "fracked" (as if that made the oil any different from oil which wasn't from a rock formation which had been hydraulically fractured), but the whole meme of presenting train wrecks as "fire and derailment", "explosion and spill--(leaving the derailment part out of the headline), etc. will present a distorted event timeline to the public psyche, placing the cargo at fault for the train wreck, not the train wreck at fault for the spillage and destruction of the cargo and destruction of anything caught up in the situation.
So the on deck batters in the game of feeling for a buzzword have become "highly explosive"--as if crude oil from the Bakken Formation is the nuclear device of crude oils, and "Bakken crude".
We drill for oil for a reason, because it is a source of energy. We can get more energy out of it than we expend to get it, transport it, and refine it into the many usable products we derive. Some of those products, as to varying degrees their source, just happen to readily combust--that is what makes them useful as fuels, their ability, when properly mixed with air to release a lot of energy. That makes the wheels go around.
But for oil of a given set of properties, it is those properties which make the oil any more or less hazardous to ship, not where or what rock formation the oil came from.
So, now, the liberals seek to make 'Bakken Oil" a dirty word.
The origin of the cargo isn't the question, how it is treated during shipment is, and blaming a rock layer two miles down and 2,000 miles away for a train wreck in Virginia seems just a mite farfetched to me.
