Dangerous Associations

Karen Carpenter died because she made a nonsensical association between something essential (food) and something harmful.

Barack Obama is working hard to create a nonsensical association between fossil fuels and something harmful. The end game is the same. Society can’t function without an adequate energy supply.

Mitt Romney responds by supporting Obama’s euthanasia of America.


About stevengoddard

Just having fun
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

34 Responses to Dangerous Associations

  1. Bill says:

    In most of the debates, Mitt would listen to hear who got
    the most applause and then say he kind of agreed with
    that person but not as strongly. He is a douche-bag.

  2. annieoakley says:

    Mitt doesn’t know much apparently. His big business model is not going to work much longer either. I am sure he isn’t a muslim so he has that going for him.

  3. scott allen says:

    who was right “Mr. Gruder” or Karen.

  4. jamzw says:

    There is this terrible need for the reasonable man to find some common cause with the unreasonable man. It is too often an unfortunate byproduct of attempting to maintain a Christian disposition. Love thine enemies? Thine enemies are feeding on your corpse.

    • Christ said love your enemies. He didn’t say agree with them.

    • Gail Combs says:

      The Christian tendency towards forgiveness and the philosophy of looking for the best in people certainly is an Achilles heel often exploited by those who are downright evil.

      It is even in Alinsky’s Rules for Radicals

      …RULE 4: “Make the enemy live up to its own book of rules.” If the rule is that every letter gets a reply, send 30,000 letters. You can kill them with this because no one can possibly obey all of their own rules. (This is a serious rule. The besieged entity’s very credibility and reputation is at stake, because if activists catch it lying or not living up to its commitments, they can continue to chip away at the damage.)

      RULE 5: “Ridicule is man’s most potent weapon.” There is no defense. It’s irrational. It’s infuriating. It also works as a key pressure point to force the enemy into concessions. (Pretty crude, rude and mean, huh? They want to create anger and fear.) …

      RULE 12: Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, and polarize it.” Cut off the support network and isolate the target from sympathy. Go after people and not institutions; people hurt faster than institutions. (This is cruel, but very effective. Direct, personalized criticism and ridicule works.)

      You can see these rules at work with how they singled out and attacked Dr Roy Spencer.

      Senator Whitehouse normally uses some of the various Session’s time to discredit Dr. Spencer as a scientist with the “Creationist” question.

      And then there is this attack:

      I just saw Roy Spencer giving testimony to a USA Senate hearing “Climate Change is Happening Now”.

      Spencer admitted: “there’s a lot of half truths in this business”.

      Then he proceeded to prove his point.

      He said that Antarctic sea ice is increasing but left out more than the half the picture, namely that the Antarctic ice melt from land is contributing to sea level rise, and that the Arctic sea ice is decreasing ever so much more than the increase in Antarctic sea ice. He claimed that he falls into the 98% of scientists who agree that humans cause global warming, asking “how much do humans contribute” while neglecting to point out that the 98% agree that humans cause most of the current global warming. At least more than half the global warming according to the Cook et al study that Spencer was referring to.

      Spencer who claimed to be a scientist who should know about climate, ended up his speech with “at some point we have to ask ourselves is all of this just mostly part of what the climate system does naturally”. Is he saying he doesn’t know?

      For an avowed Christian Roy Spencer is a terrific half-truther!
      Spencer says creation “theory” is more scientific than evolution!

      A bit later, Senator Whitehouse asks Roy Spencer if the theory of creation has a much better scientific basis than the theory of evolution (3h 23m 10 seconds): Spencer’s short answer was “yes”.

      Mixed reaction on WUWT
      Despite the efforts of Anthony Watts, there was a mixed reaction on WUWT to the senate panel hearing. Anthony led off with the headline:

      Watch yesterday’s blockbuster performance by Dr. Roger Pielke Jr. and Dr. Roy Spencer at Senate climate hearing

      Not everyone agreed that the performance of either was a “blockbuster”.
      In the comments:
      SENATOR WHITEHOUSE: Let me turn to Dr. Spencer, let me first ask a kinda unrelated question Doctor; do you believe that the Theory of Creation actually has a much better scientific basis than the Theory of Evolution?

      ROY SPENCER: Ha Ha! And why are we going in this direction?

      SENATOR WHITEHOUSE: Because it’s something you’ve said and I just want to see if you still believe it.

      ROY SPENCER: Uhh, I believe that Evolutionary Theory is mostly religion, it is naturalistic, but my faith is not strong enough to believe that everything happened by accident. I mean there’s a lot of work out there that’s shown that you can not statistically combine all of the elements that are contained in the DNA molecule by chance over however many billions of years you want to invoke or how many, how much known universe there is with all of the matter in it. So what I’m saying is some areas of science deal a lot more with faith than with known science and so I’m open to alternative explanations.

      SENATOR WHITEHOUSE: And do you still believe that the Theory of Creation actually has a much better scientific basis than the Theory of Evolution, to be specific?

      ROY SPENCER: I think, I think I could be put into a debate with someone on the other side and I think I could give more science supporting that life is created than they could support, with evidence, that life evolved through natural random processes, so yes.

      Dr. Spencer after the constant baiting for years finally loses his temper and declares:

      …Yeah, somebody pushed my button.

      When politicians and scientists started calling people like me “deniers”, they crossed the line. They are still doing it.

      They indirectly equate (1) the skeptics’ view that global warming is not necessarily all manmade nor a serious problem, with (2) the denial that the Nazi’s extermination of millions of Jews ever happened.

      Too many of us for too long have ignored the repulsive, extremist nature of the comparison. It’s time to push back.

      I’m now going to start calling these people “global warming Nazis”….

      And of course because the PLAYGROUND BULLIES finally got a rise out of him after so many years they jump on it with glee.
      Graham Readfearn “an astute student of climate change denialism” AT Desmogblog says:

      Climate Change Denier Roy Spencer Says People Who Use Word ‘Denier’ Are ‘Global Warming Nazis’
      Prince Charles is a “global warming Nazi” and, apparently, so is U.S. President Barack Obama.

      That’s according to Dr. Roy Spencer, one of the world’s most often cited deniers of the risks of human-caused climate change…

      So who else, apart from Prince Charles and U.S. President Barack Obama, will Roy Spencer be branding as “global warming Nazis” because they’ve used the term “denier”?

      ..UK climate policy advisor Sir Nicholas Stern – he’s a “global warming Nazi”. So is Al Gore. And that Richard Branson? He’s one of them there “global warming Nazis” too.

      Dr Spencer is not a fringe figure in the politicization of the science of climate change.

      He has been called at least four times by the Republican Party to give “evidence” to Congress. He is cited by prominent climate sceptic commentators around the world, including Australia’s Maurice Newman, the current Government’s top business advisor.

      Dr Spencer was also incandescent in his post at the “pseudo-scientific ramblings” of the leaders of the “global warming Nazis”.

      Step forward, every major national scientific academy on the planet, all those “global warming Nazis” at the World Bank, and the “global warming Nazis” in various defence forces around the world who increasingly see climate change as a major security issue.

      While we’re talking about “pseudo scientific ramblings”, would this be a good time to point out that Dr Spencer believes that a Christian “god” is responsible for everything on the planet and says there’s more evidence for creationism than there is for evolution?

      When Dr Spencer is not touting the merits of creationism,….

      Graham Readfearn a Brisbane-based journalist before that he worked in a pub in England.

      For what it is worth I am an agnostic and therefore have no such ‘dainty Christian feelings’ that get in the way of calling a spade a spade.

      Dr Spencer calls them ‘Global Warming Nazis’ I prefer to go straight for the throat and call them what they really are — Accessories to murder.

      • omanuel says:

        Thanks, Gail, for calling a spade a shovel.

        Big Brother is demonstrating the same traits in defeat that he exhibited as delusional ruler of the world.

        We must NOT respond in kind. Today our challenge is to:

        1. Retain the benefits of, and
        2. Eliminate the deception in

        The Great Social Experiment of 1945-2015

  5. GoneWithTheWind says:

    Stupid, conniving and intentional. The difference between the two at this point is that Obama wants to crash the system and Romney wants to get the votes by trying to be on both sides of the arguement. Either way the American citizens will be the loser. Keep voting for someone because they are “pro” or “anti” something and you will keep getting more of the same. There is a reason why the Democrats trot out the racism and sexism every thime they are losing power. To “gen” up the crazies out there who will vote on a single issue even if it hurts their pocket book or their rights. We are slowly losing everything. The politicians will continue to distract and divide us on issues that literally have nothing to do with our constitutional rights and our country. Divide and conquer.

    • Gail Combs says:

      Romney has no problem with crashing the system and wiping out the USA and its Constitution as long as he profits by it.

      Remember it was Romney who Gruber first helped to con the masses with Romneycare. With the aid of the murderous Ted Kennedy the three of them defrauded the US tax payer so it looked like it was a viable system and President Bush went along with the fraud.

      If you do not want Romney or the Twig as the next Republican nominee we need to drive home the point that the Names Romney and Bush are TOXIC!

      Otherwise we are looking at 8 years of Hitlery and the final collapse of this nation into third world status.

      • KTM says:

        I don’t blame Romney for trying RomneyCare. It was and is popular in that state and was worth trying as a strategy to reduce the outsized health care costs in Massachusetts. He correctly argued that the states are “laboratories of democracy”.

        The problem is that the laboratory conducted the experiment, then completely ignored the results. Mass had the highest health care costs of any state before RC, and they still have the highest health care costs of any state 8 years later. And in the interim health care inflation was higher in Mass than in the rest of the country.

        So, the experiment worked, the data were clear, they have just been completely ignored. It was fraudulently used as “proof of principle” for passing ObamaCare, when the opposite is true. It was actually proof that it would fail.

        • GoneWithTheWind says:

          You are right. But understand what the lesson really is. Massachusetts high cost of healthcare is easy to understand. 50 years ago Mass was the center of what was then high tech; manufacturing, machine shops, jet engines. Their politics was also traditionally Democrat which about 50 years ago began to lean further and further left; more welfare, higher taxes, “free stuff”. This resulted in a huge influx of the dependent class and legal and illegal aliens AND a huge outflux of productive people. It was the politics of the left that crashed the Mass health care system and caused hospitals to have to close their doors. That in a nutshell is America’s future. You can see it in California and other states right now. Unfettered immigration, legal and illegal, and massive welfare and other “free stuff” that cannot be paid for is the problem. Socialized health care is just another brick in the wall it is NOT an answer. The answer? End welfare, period!

      • Robertv says:

        If they had listened to the right people the experiment would not have been necessary.

        But it seems you can’t win elections without promising ‘free’ things.

  6. omanuel says:

    Yes, you can’t hide the source of energy[ 1,2] that sustains the Sun and continue to reap benefits from lies about that source of energy [3].

    The challenge ahead is to

    1. Retain the benefits and
    2. End the deception in

    The Great Social Experiment of 1945-2015

    1. Aston’s Promise & Warning (Dec 1922); CHAOS and FEAR (Aug 1945) https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/10640850/CHAOS_and_FEAR_August_1945.pdf

    2. “Solar energy,” Adv. Astronomy (submitted for on-line review, 6 JAN 2015): https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/10640850/Solar_Energy_For_Review.pdf

    3. “The Great Social Experiment of 1945-2015”

    Click to access Social_Experiment.pdf

  7. Eric Simpson says:

    My hotair comment yesterday:

    It was noted by a Romney aid that Romney, while he was MA governor, was always “the [climate change] radical in the room,” insisting that man is going to cause catastrophic warming unless we take drastic action.

    Then Romney flipped because he was running for the R nomination. Now for some reason Romney has flipped again: http://weaselzippers.us/211685-mitt-romney-does-the-rare-triple-flip-flop-global-warming-is-real-and-a-major-problem/


    “A growing body of evidence suggests that the kind of extreme cold being experienced by much of the United States as we speak is a pattern we can expect to see with increasing frequency, as global warming continues.” -John Holdren, 2014

    Right, hot is causing it to be cold. Utterly stupid.

    Hmm, John Holdren, who is that? That’s Obama’s current “Science Czar.” But surprisingly, the leftist nutcase Holdren was also Romney’s “Climate Change” Adviser.

    Here are a a couple more quotes from Romney’s advisor. And these quotes would have likely been seen by Romney before he hired Holdren:

    “A massive campaign must be launched to de-develop the United States… [we] must design a stable, low-consumption economy in which there is a much more equitable distribution of wealth.” -John Holdren, 1973

    “Laws requiring compulsory abortion could be sustained under the existing Constitution if the population crisis became sufficiently severe.” -John Holdren, 1981

  8. dom says:

    We should have taken President Eisenhower’s advice. So the only hope for us not is to somehow curtail or stop stop the “revolving doors” into and out of the policy-making positions (public trust) in the government(s)….into and out of the “greased” interests. A policy-maker should not be allowed to force a law upon us requiring widgets, then turn around and go to work for a widget company. The so-called “Think Tanks”, “Institutions”, and “Centers for Studies” are the conduits people are using to go to and from the revolving doors. The amount of financial interest our politicians have in Iran and in other “enemy” territories won’t even make the back page.

    So much for lofty ideas….

  9. Robertv says:

    Stop talking democrats or republicans. It is the Federal Reserve which is in power and not We The People. It is the Federal Reserve euthanizing America. It does not matter who you vote for it will not change politics. You’re screwed !

  10. scizzorbill says:

    Hillary and Mitt for Prez and VP. The 2 commies go together like climate and change.

  11. cheshirered says:

    Incredible that Obama has been undeservedly bailed out economically by a shale gas revolution he had no influence on, while simultaneously doing his level best to hobble America with an astonishingly stupid energy policy.

  12. gofer says:

    Prince of Wales calls for climate ‘Magna Carte’ to save the planet:


    The “contagious disease” is back. He once wished he could come back as disease and wipe out humanity. Real compassionate guy that is chock full of nuttiness.

  13. KTM says:

    Mitt Romney would have been infinitely better than Obama in either 2008 or 2012. But now the damage from the last 6+ years is so severe that Romney would be a very poor choice for President in 2016. He is too much of an establishment Republican, if not a liberal RINO, and would do a fantastic job of managing the continued decline and implosion of the country. We need someone that will change the direction of the country, not just expertly drive it further off the cliff.

    If it’s a decision between Mitt and a Democrat, I think I’d rather have the Democrat at this point. At least then they own the implosion and perhaps an actual Republican could then be elected to sift through the wreckage.

    • Truthseeker says:


      It is kind of the same in Australia. Tony Abbott, although a decent person, is not nearly “Liberal” (as in the Australian political party) enough. He is not doing enough to reverse the damage that Rudd/Gillard did. All political parties are ultimately about power over principle and so the only choice the voters get is over the speed of the car as it heads towards the cliff.

      The sad thing is that best result that we can hope for is for the collectivists achieve their aims in both countries and then the mess will get so bad that a whole generation will realise the mistake and lurch (possibly violently) away from collectivism and hit the “reset” button that is so desperately required.

  14. pyromandcer76 says:

    Steven Goddard, you provide powerful metaphors in the search for truths and responsible action. Thanks for truly understanding the dark side and being able to articulate it in a way that hits the gut — euthanasia, especially self-euthanasia.

    Maybe Romney would have been better than Hussein, but I think they are both enemies of this country. I did not say that of Romney when he ran last time — and voted for him — but when I saw the kind of stupid, gutless, technologically illiterate campaign he ran (after shark attacks on other Republicans in the primary), he is an enemy. Perhaps he is more of an empty chair than the current occupant — who has laser-like malevolent intent. Romney’s candidacy must be toast, burnt to a crisp, forever and ever more.

  15. Cheyne Gordon says:

    “Karen Carpenter died because she made a nonsensical association between something essential (food) and something harmful.”

    If Karen Carpenter had eaten Momma Cass’ meal, they might both be alive today 😉

  16. Truthseeker says:

    How is this for a dangerous association …


    From the Islamic Human Rights Commission. Maybe someone should update the Wikipedia definition of “Oxymoron” using this organisation as a prime example.

    Barak Obama gets a nomination … bet he doesn’t win it though ….

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s