A Kool Aid Drinker By Any Other Name...(Or Should I say Another Name?)

For a very long time now anyone who was all in for some idea, particularly the more wacky--OK, insane-- ideas, was said to have drank the Kool Aid®.   This phrase derives from Jim Jones and his People's Temple, who were denied exile in Russia from their paranoid-delusional self-imposed exile on an "agricultural mission" in the socialist armpit of Guyana.

Everyone in the U.S was, after all, out to spin their little cult as a bunch of crazed-whacko's.

So to prove them wrong, and rather than risk being captured or subjected to fascism--(no proper far left-communist would ever allow themselves to be subjected to the not-quite-so-far-left-left-as fascism)--they proved the "they are a bunch of wackos crowd" wrong by committing mass suicide with a mixture of cyanide and Kool-Aid.  Some say it was grape Flavor-aid.  The 900 plus formerly-living residents of Jonestown who drank the 'Kool-Aid" were too dead to debate the point, but 'Drinking the Kool-Aid' quickly became a part of the collective consciousness and a sign that you were all-in on whatever it was, (to quote the Orbit Girl) "no matter what." (Fabulous!)

Which brings me to my point.

The left is so obsessed with using government power to engineer their own superiority--stacking the Social Darwinism playing cards if you prefer--that they are forever casting words and phrases (and clauses) into the primordial ichor of what passes for the semi-subconscious of the common man.  With the help of a complicit media-entertainment-industrial-complex they bombard our senses with their "socio-political advertising."  Let's call it that Orwellian certain-something, (cue Wagner-like orchestral crescendo).  And like any good social-Darwinist, adaptation is the 'New World Order" of the day.  That would be the day after whatever day it was they discovered that people were no longer buying into tho bulls**t.  Like how they switched to Climate Change when Global Warming seemed a somewhat stupid description with the globe not actually warming, or how Planned Parenthood is looking for a nice replacement for Pro-Choice because too many people who claim to be pro-choice are actually against choice unless it is their choice.

Well I think turnabout is fair play.  Part of the theory of Darwin was specialization so why not apply specialization to the social Darwinists who have been drinking the Flavor-Aid and trying to pass it off on the rest of us as if it were Kool-Aid.

No, I'm not thinking we should switch to 'Flavor-Aid.'  I was thinking of compartmentalizing some of the environmentalist Flavor-Aid Drinkers Kool-Aid drinkers with a more obsession-specific reference.  Something that ties them to their own tin-foil-hat, crack-pot, jet-setting, carbon spewing, selling his pro-environmental tv network to a fossil-fuel mining billionaire emirate anti-American cable network, that fat, rich, hypocrite-extraordinaire, Al Gore.

(rest)

From now on those who promote the Global Warming Climate change Green Agenda and repeat the garbage that spews from the mouth of Al-Gwhore (sometimes spelled 'G-O-R-E', the Goracle, al Gore, ALGORE, and so on)  should no longer be reffered to as having drank the Kool Aid.  We should instead say something like..."look who ate all the Goreos."

Yeah, it was a lot of work for a six word punch-line but I think it was worth it.

(And yes,of course  they'd have green filling.)

You are reading  "A Kool Aid Drinker By Any Other Name…(Or Should I say Another Name?)"   by  Steve Mac Donald originally posted at GraniteGrok.com (Home)

Steve has been recognized as the Americans For Prosperity Blogger of the month for December 2012

Why “Green” Energy?

If you wanted to bring western civilization down, give it a good beating for all its so-called malfeasance, what better way than to make it near impossible to sustain the things that made being a western civilization all it was cracked up to be?

Consider that which makes us or any of our allies any sort of global power?  Wealth and energy.  Commerce, industrialization, transportation, and militarization to protect it or project it.

We can mince the finer points about what makes all this possible but they all share one thing in common.  Cheap, abundant energy.

So if you had a mind to take the average Western Civilization down a notch or two, or even all of them, to make an example of a country like, say America, the fastest way to do that would be to cry wolf about something that would be difficult to dispute and easy to frighten people with; something that would make cheap abundant energy so threatening that no one would pay much attention to the real threats that not having it might present; you’d put forward a theory of global catastrophe that demanded we redirect massive amounts of wealth into expensive forms of energy incapable of sustaining the level of commerce, industrialization, transportation, or defense that we’ve come to enjoy.

You’d invent Global Warming and then blame the people who make the cheap abundant energy for causing it.

It is a simple fact that you can’t run an aircraft (personal, pleasure, commercial or military), a fleet of ships (or any ship), large amounts of ground transportation, an army, or anything meaningful on wind, solar, or even ethanol.  (Without getting side-tracked on how ethanol is actually worse from creation to application).   In fact there are no “clean” energies in the American left’s “solution” to the problem they’ve invented (in America even nuclear energy is not ‘clean’) that would allow us to continue to engage the world in any meaningful way.  The left’s energy plan systematically denies us our commercial/industrial prowess, reduces or eliminates the size and scope of our national defense, forces us to be more reliant on other nations (many of them hostile) for what cheap energy we are allowed, and would inevitably limit our ability to move about our own country and our world with as much freedom as we’d like.

(Fracking and Natural Gas have grown in this void but the left still does not approve.  Even cheap easily acceible energy from friendly Canada (Keystone pipeine) was and is blocked. Why?  Becasue they slow the desired decline.  Only threats to their hold on power soften the negative rhetoric but just the rhetoric–no meanigful concessions are ever given.

And this is how it has been for years.

Fo decades the left has been doing everything they can to make “being an energy rich America” difficult or as expensive as possible.  They have prohibited new development, blocked domestic refining capacity, taxed, feed, and regulated growth in energy to a stand-still, and kept nuclear from being anything but an expensive and frightening proposition.  Every and any reason will do up to an including unsubstantiated threats of planet wide apocalypse.  This has made the energy we can develop more expensive, impacting everything else in the process.  Revenue spent on the rising cost of energy is not spent elsewhere.  This means less growth, lowered GDP, fewer jobs, less choices and opportunities.

The left has admitted that it wants gas to cost more, to end coal as we know it, to control our thermostats (through fear and guilt first, price pressure, or even the law if necessary), so they can make their less useful alternatives comparable in price.

And for what?  A theory that continues to lose support.  And it is losing support because despite pumping CO2 into the air at increasing rates the world just continues to do what it always did.  It gets warmer here, colder there, less ice up north, more ice down south, and after nearly two decades of “boys who cry global warming wolf” the average global temperate is exactly the same.

It can’t be for any other purpose but than to bring us down.  To break us before the global court of opinion and allow other nations to fill the gaps we leave behind. And there is still significant political will in the United States, on the left,  to move forward with the green energy agenda that makes our decline possible.  To continue to deny billions for productive purposes so they can dump billions of public dollars into energy solutions whose only result will be less of everything that makes us an advanced and powerful western civilization.  Into things that would make us just another chess piece on a global board occupied by China, India, and Russia–all of whom are to be respected as global partners but whom have no qualms about the need for cheap abundant CO2 producing energy to keep their nations running and growing; to sustain a military capable of projecting their worldview when and where they will feel the need; to protect their global interests, including those on continued access to cheap, abundant, energy.   So it cannot be a political will to move us into the next century unless it is to do so on our knees.

There is no other excuse for this behavior but to steward the accelerated decline of America as a nation unable to compete, one with a stunted manufacturing base and a small military it cannot afford to project to defend its own global interests, one that might not even be able to adequately defend its own borders.

Yes, we’d be able to lob some rockets about, but everything else relies on fuels that have been demonized, the same ones that allow you to get to work, travel (things the left wants to build public trains to replace), heat your home, and in some cases–like coal–use all the modern devices that run on electricity without breaking the bank.  And consider that reduced production of these fuels would require the state to divert them to the governments purposes as a matter of national priority–to run the things that the government needs that cannot be run without them–leaving the rest of us, citizens, those industries not favored by connected corporatists, to scrabble over the unsatisfying scraps left for us by the state.

Forget sustaining a free and powerful nation that can live without constant fear from its enemies.   You can’t even keep your population comfortable under those terms. Not that the leaders of the socialist left care.  They’ll be very comfortable.

You are reading  “Why Green Energy”   by  Steve Mac Donald originally posted at GraniteGrok.com (Home)

Steve has been recognized as the Americans For Prosperity Blogger of the month for December 2012

It's Not Easy Being Green...

Kermit the Frog was getting tired of blending in when he sang the words, "It isn't easy being green."  But he's got nothing on the GoreBama environmental crowd.  These greens are having a horrible time fitting reality to their wilting rhetoric.

First, Evergreen Solar in Massachusetts, recipient of $58 million in subsidies to promote green jobs, filed for bankruptcy and moved all 800 jobs to China.  Proof once more that Obama really is creating or saving millions of jobs...for the Chinese...at your expense.

Next up, CERN, a big to do European concern in the world of science (high energy physics), finally succumbed to science over politics, and let some researchers test a few theories about cloud formation that they had been reluctant to allow.  The results may well unhinge the anthropogenic global warming cart from its team of asses.  We now have hard scientific evidence that cosmic radiation increases cloud cover.  Cloud cover has a significant impact on warming.  Up side?  Al Gores massively hypocritical carbon footprint is even less of an actual risk to the planet than prior to the CERN  announcement.

But fear not Planeteers! Al Gore Warming (AGW) will not be undone so easily.

(Read the whole thing)

Silent Autumn?

The Carson-Gore Academy of Environmental Sciences in California (tin foil hats are mandatory) was built on top of a piece of contaminated land.  Oh yeah baby.  There are of course 'concerns' for the welfare of the students. (The 75 million dollar School was named after Rachel Carson and Al Gore--Environmental scaremongering is probably also required.)

Wonder if Gore is pissed because he got second billing.  I mean he did win an Oscar and a Peace Prize.  Carson just guaranteed millions of third world deaths from mosquito borne illness.  Oh wait.  I see why she got top billing.  My mistake.

Anyway, they are rushing to replace bad dirt with good dirt to avoid a delay in the new school year.  I'm sure that will fix it.  They should bring that dirt to Al's new California mansion--or did Tipper get that one?  Hey--that probably works better for Al.

Read it here. 

Is it Getting Colder?

Something you won't find in your daily broadsheet, or on any of the more fashionable cable news channels, is a paper presented by a prominent geologist at the 4th international conference on Climate Change in Chicago.  In it Dr. Don Easterbrook warns of us imminent global cooling. (oh boy)

I'll see your warming, and raise you cooling.

I'm sure the good doctor will be characterized as a denier, a quack, and a puppet of the  Oil companies, and Sarah Palin because if he is right, the decades long obstruction by the wing nuts of cheap, reliable energy will become a serious problem. 

According to Dr. Easterbrook the problems are..

 That global warming is over, at least for a few decades, might seem to be a relief. However, the bad news is that global cooling is even more harmful to humans than global warming and a cause for even greater concern because:

1. A recent study showed that twice as many people are killed by extreme cold than by extreme heat.

2. Global cooling will have an adverse effect on food production because of shorter growing seasons, cooler growing seasons, and bad weather during harvest seasons. This is already happening in the Midwestern U.S., China, India, and other places in the world. Hardest hit will be third world countries where millions are already near starvation levels.

3. Increase in per capita energy demands, especially for heating.

4. Decrease in the ability to cope with problems related to the population explosion. World population is projected to reach more than 9 billion by 2050, an increase of 50%. This means a substantial increase in demand for food and energy at a time when both are decreasing because of the cooling climate.

Global waring is over.  Makes you want to stuff your fuel tank with food based fuels, and charge the batteries from the frozen motors of wind turbines.

It is cooler.  And this is already shaping up to be another cool (short) summer in New England with a stunted growing season.  But the Warming denier-deniers will not be deterred.  Not because they think Easterbook is a quack--and I'm not prepared to answer that question either way but I suspect he's not--but because there is no obvious path to centralized domination and taxation of the entire energy industry if cooling presents itself as a viable issue for the next thirty years. 

How does a liberal convince you you can stop cooling?  They can't. 

Cooling for a few years is not uncommon, nor is warming.  But cooling gives this whole debate something of an ant and grasshopper feel to it.  We played while it was warm and wasted opportunities to develop more oil and gas--even nuclear--to prepare for later because of how we felt we wanted the science to work to justify a left wing political goal.   Millions have fallen for this nonsense.   So here's a question captain planet and the planeteers?  Is Hugo Chavez going to donate that much more free heating oil to his liberal comrades in the USSA when he could charge us twice as much because we have Cape Wind and solar panels that don't work so well where its cold while he and the other communist style countries have been drilling up our oil because we left green-weenie panty-waists in charge for too long?

My suggestion?  Same as always.  Warm or cold.  Create a real energy economy. Create jobs in the energy sector we know works first by cutting all these wasted taxpayer billions on green crapnogoly and simply deregulate and stimulate nuclear and carbon based fuel technology instead.  Want to create jobs?  American Oil and Gas.  All the infrastructure required to build rigs and refineries creates jobs.  Feeding and clothing workers creates jobs.  Invest in more clean air technology for carbon based energy to deal with our ever improving pollution issues instead of pretending exhaled breath is a planet killer and that creates jobs taxpayer don;t have to pay for.

You want green jobs for failed science or real jobs that pay green? Real "green jobs" are real jobs that pay real money.  And those are in oil and gas and coal, and oil shale, and on and on.

We Drive oil futures down and let that saved money trickle into the entire economy.  And all the cash saved on cheap energy (and the promise of a futre with cheap energy) will get spent on food and cars and luxuryitems whose production will create even (OMG!) more jobs.   And all the profits the energy companies makecan be used to make jobs and encourage private invest in newer forms of energy because they want to be in business for the next few hundred years, not because they can stay in business with a fixed monopoly by federal mandate on the taxpayers diminishing dime.

And if you want ethanol make it with algae not dinner, and that keeps the world fed as well.

Liberals are stupid.  They have invited you along on their delusion and too many of us took the bait.  Well it's time to wake up.  Hot cold, who gives a damn.  It's not about CO2 or pollution, it has been the lefts crusade to destroy the energy industry and to use that to control the means of production, and they are happy to make you pay for it, just like everything else they want.  So tell them to go to hell. (Where as I understand it, Warming is not an issue).  Build the energy economy now and it will find viable new alternatives on its own for the future.