Because for once I think Obama did a great job.
A lot of people are criticizing the president over the Syrian conflict and they state that he has no nerve and he will not do what “American needs to do” as if bombing some despot in a third world is what America should be doing. Now granted, doing nothing like he has is sometimes the best course of action. And in so doing nothing, the president has accomplished the following:
The Holocene Climate Optimum was a period of time 8000-5000 years BP (before present) where temperatures were from 1 to 2 degrees C warmer than today is. Even after all of the “unprecedented warming” that we have seen in the last 100 years we are still cooler than the height of this time period.
So the obvious question is: Why is this time period called the Climate Optimum when it was up to 2 degrees warmer than today AND we are also told by the same climate scientists that 2 degrees of warming would result in catastrophe?
Most people have reconciled with the fact that Obama will be president for the next four years. Obama is of course a raging narcissistic person where we can see it from his reactions to criticism in the debates with Romney (the rage) or the constant manipulation and lies he tells. The largest question right now is, wow do we deal with this as a country? It’s not going to be the end of the world as some claim, but knowing what is going to happen can help us all out. Obama as a rule is going to stick to his initial thoughts on things. Narcissistic people do not change their minds for rational reasons and will stick to a course no matter how illogical it is. In the end, a narcissistic person does not reason at all and thinks the world revolves around himself or herself. In this sense, we can expect more of the same. Things won’t get worse as some people believe, but they won’t get any better in that sense. Obama will continue to pile on the liberal agenda which he believes will save the country. But he will do it slowly and sporadically as before. A narcissistic above all else is arbitrary on what they do and say. I am not sure exactly which part of the agenda he will focus on primarily to start or what will be done later because frankly a narcissistic person is not rational and will do what they want to do based on rather abstract reasoning that no one could ever hope to understand. The truest way to deal with a narcissistic person is just to ignore them, but unfortunately in this case we have no choice as the president can not be ignored.
Note: The terms used here are alarmists or believers for people who support and otherwise believe that global warming is caused mostly by man.
Sceptics is used as people who are sceptical that man has a “large” impact on climate and tend to believe that Global warming is either caused partially or “very little” by man or is too small to detect to no impact at all.
Projectionism is defined as attributing one’s one thoughts, feelings or behaviors onto another person or set of people to prove a point. There could be a point that this is done all the time in politics as a “pre-emptive” attack on the other side to stop the other side from insulting said person. In that case, it seems like a case of sour grapes when someone is just insulting back with the same insult and this tool is used rather successfully in politics. Any insult or derision given to one side is often (but I should caution and say not always) more appropriate for the person making such remarks. Although there are many cases of this in the media and elsewhere, the same is true in global warming or climate change politics which I will remind people is no longer about science but more about politics and religion now where it takes a “leap of faith” to believe in the science or not.
Pictured: Michelangelo’s painting of God; A very appropriate picture for an essay on projectionism.
The entire premise of “requiring an ID to vote” has always baffled me. What is the problem with going to vote and proving who you are? It’s not like people who function in society are not required to present ID to cash checks, board a plane, or even buy full strength Sudafed over the counter. This is a famous uttering that I paraphrased from the Kansas Secretary of State Kris Kobach. Every state has a process where someone can get a free non-driver’s license if they do not want to drive and to top this out, if you can not get yourself to a DMV to get a free picture ID, how the heck can you function in modern society?
In picture: Mike Turzai of Pennsylvania who recently got into trouble with this quote: “”Voter ID, which is going to allow Gov. Romney to win the state of Pennsylvania – done,”. Opinion: One way to look at it, without voter fraud, perhaps Romney can win the state of Pa.
The era of the Robber Barons is a fascinating time when the rich would cheat, steal, sabotage and even murder people in order to get rich. The accounts from this era are sketchy and although the dynamics of the town of Butte in particular are rather interesting, the town itself gives a great look into what life is like without regulation and what regulation can do when applied properly.
But without going into a great detail on the robber baron angle, there are many great places to read about the politics and the fortunes being made in the town which was the king of copper in the US for a time I highly recommend this book for this endeavor if one is interested:
CB, Glasscock, “War of the Copper Kings”, copublished by Montana Historical Society Press and Riverbend Publishing. http://montanahistoricalsociety.org/pub/press/warcopperkings.asp
Although domestically some may say Ron Paul has some great views and that this man could save our country from our current debt crisis, there are some great problems with what he says and believes. Very few people who like him refute this and seem to agree that there are some issues here. The problem is not inherently in that he is too political but the problem comes to his lack of pragmatism. In the real world, you can take the moral high ground for as long as you want, but in the end your morals have to be questioned and have to be pushed everyday and judged not in the black and white like you believe they are, but in the shades of gray that every single decision we make is actually a part of. This is life, and this is what the man Ron Paul misses out on. He is a good politician and without getting into the political disagreements and problems I have with his past, I will just focus on what he says about his ideals and the issues therein.
The latest threat to free speech (And freedom in general) is not really a threat per se, but more the implications of the precedent that is currently being set. This threat is rather insidious in that lies are being told by omission and/or through half-truths set to deceive people of what the actual truth is. To be fair, this is true in just about every free democracy today. In this case among others, some speech is considered free and championed and speech of the same type from a different viewpoint is termed hateful rhetoric”,”racist” , and even “radical.” This double standard of where speech of one type is termed “heroic” and the same style of speech elsewhere is termed “radical” is a double-standard where our own media is abusing the freedom of the press and where Governments as well are using this to insult and rather persecute people not based on what they say but based on their feelings and the political implications on the issue.
Take a recent site I found on “facts about Australia”. At this site at : http://www.state.gov/r/pa/ei/bgn/2698.htm It says among other things the following:
“Gillard is pursuing her campaign promises to build a national broadband network and price carbon. ” But as I have written about before: this is false. Video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=40EWX6TXgH4
One of the largest issues today is the question of how to regulate greenhouse gases. Most of the Obama administration’s efforts to do so hinges on the supreme court’s 2007 decision otherwise known as the “endangerment finding”. This decision unknown to most people did not state that the EPA “must regulate greenhouse gases.” On the contrary, the decision made no claim in either direction on that particular point. The decision merely stated that the EPA’s current arguments against stating that GHG’s are not pollution were not valid. This part of the decision, however, is deeply flawed as well.
Picture courtesy of: http://www.solstation.com/stars/earth.htm
For anyone listening to the president recently, he seems to like to repeat that lie that his plan “to tax the rich” is not class warfare. I guess the assumption with him is that if he repeats this lie enough times it makes it true and perhaps he is a hero in his own eyes from the novel 1984 where double-speak is normal and where everything done is good by the Government. Really odd that supposedly a well-educated person could think like this.
What are we supposed to do with a president who is so far from reality that he has no clue what normal Americans deal with? While the president is giving away barrels of money to solar companies and other cronies, the rest of us have to have a balanced budget that is not in the trillions of dollars. He will not balance a budget or pay down what is owed like American’s are forced to. So what do we do? Well the solution like in 1984 is to put the truth out for the world to see.
BenfromMO 