Tiny Crowd Of Morons


These geniuses left their fossil fuel heated and powered cars for a few minutes to take a picture protesting global warming. Then they scurried back to their cars, turned the heat on and drove back to their coal powered homes to enjoy the rest of the day.

Note that there is no visible pollution coming out of that clean power plant.

How do humans get this stupid?

About stevengoddard

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

53 Responses to Tiny Crowd Of Morons

  1. markstoval says:

    Morons all, to be sure.

    But the real problems is that I know decent people who are totally convinced that “science” has proven that mankind is overheating the planet and that we need to stop using CO2. They think the “science is settled” on the issue.

    A challenge to you Tony (and to the regulars as well): come up with a short summary that would start to change the mind of a thinking person that is only suffering under the weight of lies and propaganda and is willing to look at facts. What could one say in 5 minutes or less to wake up a person?

    • Lawrence 13 says:

      These people are stretching the science as it suits their self-loathing hatred of their very ancestry. Its funny how these very same lefty collection of affluent ingrates, mistrust science all the time . They mistrust and demonstrate against frakking, GM foods, pharmaceutical science, engineering, medical you name it yet when it comes to AGW they all of a sudden tell us the scientist are to be trusted implicitly-well the AGW ones of course. No in their demented world they mistrust all science bar AGW science because its the weapon they want vent their bitter self hating spleens with.

      • NielsZoo says:

        It’s because science has nothing to do with it at any level. The schools and media continue to push the Progressive agenda by keeping people ignorant. The vast majority of them aren’t stupid, they are either ignorant by design from the structure of our “education” system run by Progressives and Socialist unions or they’re the true believers at the top of the food chain. They don’t believe in any of the garbage they’re selling, but they do believe that they are the only ones “qualified” to make decisions for the human race.

        Education, truth, science or freedom in the hands of the people is abhorrent to them. An educated population would tell them what to do with their coal regulations, skyrocketing electricity prices, confiscatory taxes, bureaucratic control of their lives and the rest of their oppressive oligarchy. We did it once back in 1776 and I really hope that we can fix this without resorting to that level of “disagreement” with our government and the Progressive elite that are using it to destroy our Republic and the even more heinous crime of denying hundreds of millions in the Third World a chance to move out of the Stone Age prison this eco-garbage has created for them.

        • gator69 says:

          But sadly, the self-loathing progressives will not assist third worlders in becoming civilized, even in civilized countries. Progressives are poverty and ignorance enablers.

          Viewers must have gasped at the sheer depravity when racial violence victim Phoebe Connolly, who was assaulted by “teens” playing the Knockout Game in DC, came on Greta Van Susteren’s show last Wednesday night to defend her attackers. But her bizarre reaction was no isolated incident.

          Here is what Ms. Connolly had to say after her brush with savagery — an incident she was lucky to survive:

          “I’ve moved past it and I really have no hard feelings about what has happened. And I just see it as another reason why we need to better support our youth with activities and youth programs, which is actually what I do for work, and it’s great to see teenagers do incredible things when they’re supported and empowered.”

          Incredible things, like randomly attacking whites for laughs, sometimes killing them.

          Connolly’s pathology is not limited to white American liberals who are assailed by black mobs.

          Norway was once accustomed to peace and order. Then came Muslim colonization — encouraged by liberal politicians and lavishly financed through the welfare state at taxpayer expense. Incidents of rape have consequently skyrocketed. Muslims only make up 1.5% of the population of Norway at this point, and already account for 50% of the entire country’s rape statistics, including 90% of the rapes in Oslo.

          With that background in mind, consider the case of Arild Opheim and Elin Ruhlin Gjuvsland, a couple who work for the government’s left-wing NRK TV and radio broadcasting system. Their house was invaded by colonists who robbed them blind and physically abused them, bashing Elin over the head with a blunt metal object. The assailants explicitly stated that they were doing this because they were being deported, and that the victims deserved it for being Norwegian.

          The couple wrote a book about the experience, entitled Uninvited Guests, in which they told of the threat they faced: not the threat of being killed, but of becoming “racists” — that is, of losing faith in political correctness:

          As Elin put it, she came dangerously close to buying the theory “that immigrants are just coming here to exploit us, that we have to make sure that there won’t want be too many of them, and that we’re going to be overpopulated with certain nationalities in fifty years.” She’d begun to worry that thanks to lax immigration policies, there was “going to be massive crime so that we’re not safe in our own city.” In short, she was on the brink: “I thought: ‘Damn it, is this going to turn me into a racist?’”

          Liberals will be relieved to hear that they did not become “racists,” but rather came to agree with their attackers that they deserved to be robbed and beaten for being Norwegian, on the grounds that Norway has not bent over backward far enough to accommodate the kind of people who robbed and beat them.

          If progressives will sacrifice themselves out of devotion to their demented ideology, they certainly will not have a problem sacrificing the rest of us.


          Their devotion to demented ideology.

          Insanity, thy name is Progressive!

    • Slywolfe says:

      “… change the mind of a thinking person …”

      A “thinking person” already knows better. The challenge is to get people to think.

      • markstoval says:


        I know of people who are educated and do think. But they have lives and kids and jobs and they hear over and over that the science is settled — CO2 causes global warming. Hell, I would get banned at WUWT if I mentioned that I don’t think it is possible for CO2 to do anything but cool the planet — and they are supposed to be fellow skeptics.

        One does not need to be a “hippie leftie” to be the victim of this massive propaganda offensive.

    • Gail Combs says:

      All I can suggest is carrying index cards with the following papers and URLs listed that you can hand out so they can see for themselves you are not talking through your hat.

      Do not try to talk them out of CO2 causing Global Warming, instead address what that means in terms of WHEN we are and the fact plants are close to CO2 starvation (Plants would say 1500 ppm would be much much better if they could talk.)

      #1. Earth has been near CO2 starvation for plants for millions of years because the plants and the oceans took CO2 out of the atmosphere and sequestered it as rock (coal, limestone….)

      Carbon starvation in glacial trees recovered from the La Brea tar pits, southern California.

      The royal Society: Carbon dioxide starvation, the development of C4 ecosystems, and mammalian evolution.

      The decline of atmospheric carbon dioxide over the last 65 million years (Ma) resulted in the ‘carbon dioxide–starvation’ of terrestrial ecosystems and led to the widespread distribution of C4 plants, which are less sensitive to carbon dioxide levels than are C3 plants.

      #2. (This is critical) The Climate Scientists say the entire CO2 forcing for zero ppm to the present level is 32 to 44 W m–2 [cf., Reid, 1997]. However all but 5 to 6 W m–2 of that forcing occurs in the first 200 ppm CO2 (modtran) A CO2 concentration of 200 ppm is where plants barely survive but where they may not be able to reproduce. So please keep in mind we are talking about at max 4 to 5 W m–2.

      #3. WHEN are we in the Milankovitch cycles.

      The earth is 200 yrs past point two centuries or so beyond the possible glacial inception of half the present precession cycle and will not return to optimum solar insolation for 65,000 years.


      The Loutre and Berger (2003) paper based on a model run suggested the Holocene would be a double precession cycle like MIS11 . Observational data put Loutre and Berger (2003) to rest just 2 years later with Lisieki and Raymo (Oceanography, 2005) exhaustive look at 57 globally distributed deep Ocean Drilling Project (and other) cores.

      A Pliocene-Pleistocene stack of 57 globally distributed benthic D18O records by
      Lisiecki & Raymo

      Click to access Lisiecki_Raymo_2005_Pal.pdf

      However, the 21 June insolation minimum at 65°N during MIS 11 is only 489 W/m2, much less pronounced than the present minimum of 474 W/m2. In addition, current insolation values are not predicted to return to the high values of late MIS 11 for another 65 kyr. We propose that this effectively precludes a ‘‘double precession cycle’’ interglacial [e.g., Raymo, 1997] in the Holocene without human influence….

      Other Papers also suggest Human influence is what has kept the earth from descending into glaciation.

      An older paper from 2007 also agrees Lesson from the past: present insolation minimum holds potential for glacial inception

      ….Because the intensities of the 397 ka BP and present insolation minima are very similar, we conclude that under natural boundary conditions the present insolation minimum holds the potential to terminate the Holocene interglacial. Our findings support the Ruddiman hypothesis [Ruddiman, W., 2003. The Anthropogenic Greenhouse Era began thousands of years ago. Climate Change 61, 261–293], which proposes that early anthropogenic greenhouse gas emission prevented the inception of a glacial that would otherwise already have started….

      A newer paper from the fall of 2012 a href=”http://www.clim-past.net/8/1473/2012/cp-8-1473-2012.pdf”>Can we predict the duration of an interglacial? agrees and gives the calculated solar insolation values @ 65N on June 22 for several glacial inceptions:

      Current value – insolation = 479W m−2 (from that paper)

      MIS 7e – insolation = 463 W m−2,
      MIS 11c – insolation = 466 W m−2,
      MIS 13a – insolation = 500 W m−2,
      MIS 15a – insolation = 480 W m−2,
      MIS 17 – insolation = 477 W m−2

      (Changes near the north polar area, about 65 degrees North, are considered important due to the great amount of land. Land masses respond to temperature change more quickly than oceans.)

      You can look up the Solar insolation values for 60 degrees North in june (2nd column ) at NOAA and see how close the earth is to the lowest energy value.

      Holocene peak insolation: 523 Wm-2
      ………………………………………………………..decrease = 47 Wm-2
      NOW (modern Warm Period) 476 Wm-2
      ……………………………………………………….. decrease = 12 Wm-2
      Depth of the last ice age – around 464 Wm−2

      Now compare that to the 5 Wm-2 from CO2 forcing.

      • markstoval says:

        Thanks Gail for the list and the thoughts on the issue. I will give it a try. 🙂

        • Gail Combs says:

          Good luck. Hope it works.

          I find a hand written index card really helps. (MUST be hand written.) Either that or the back of a business card you write the titles down on in front of them. That works the best since it seems much more off the cuff and also demonstrates you know what you are talking about and have done a lot of research.

    • Michael 2 says:

      “What could one say in 5 minutes or less to wake up a person?”

      Be the shepherd. Sheep follow shepherds. Nothing you say is likely to make the slightest difference. Note also that shepherds are at times merely sheep with initiative.

    • Andy DC says:

      I know a lot of very nice, seemingly intelligent people that have simply been brainwashed. They always come back with “why don’t you believe in science?” I can site factual data until I am blue in the face and they simply refuse to believe it.

    • geronimo says:

      Ask them if they hadn’t been told the world was warming/suffering climate change would they know it was?

  2. Lawrence 13 says:

    I truly believe that in the future the spoilt, immature , self-hating, self -loathing of the white lefty middle class off-spring will be identified as a social condition peculiar to all pampered brats . It really is an extension of initially hating their families if they offer boundaries and care to getting older and then despising their own background and countries -but predominantly in the developed western countries. But as a colleague of mine says the left have an infinite capacity for lies, hatred, hypocrisy and cruelty.

    • nielszoo says:

      We need to get it listed as some kind of hip syndrome, disease or ?iosis. Preferably using the name of some lefty celebrity like “Atransitive Clooney’s Disease” or “Bihemispherical Oprahitis Syndrome.” Then we get big pharma to create the next new, cutting edge, must have drug to treat it and a wiz bang “intervention” program that everyone “popular” ends up in. (Like current drug or sex rehab now.) We make absolutely sure that Obamacare covers it and we also make it available in the “medical” marijuana joints. The part we don’t tell them is that it’s re-branded high dose Thorazine and once we’ve got them all safely doped up and isolated (so they can’t hurt themselves) we start the anti-brainwashing… like teaching basic math and responsibility. Those things most of us DID learn in kindergarten.

  3. rah says:

    It is quite simply the hypocrisy and lack of critical thinking they are being taught. As long as the left controls academia and schools it will only get worse. But what do I know? I’m just a dumb truck driver.

    • Andy Oz says:

      Left wing nuts have been running public schools in western countries since the 70’s, infecting kids and now a 2nd generation with a poisonous Marxist doctrine. Private schools have been marginalised, making money is demonised (except for the progressives) or been hijacked by the fiat money shysters, and finally orthodox Christian religion has largely self immolated with deviants and snake oil salesmen. There are few leaders of merit left with the morality for the young to learn from. Ethics are a list of slogans hijacked by the left sycophants and only their version is allowed. (eg they exhibit zero criticism of Islamic terrorists)
      I have done my best to inoculate my kids from this crap, and hope they survive this era. I do think that as we pass through the Crisis stage, this Fourth Turning, much of the failed ideologies will be wiped out, unfortunately by conflict. I had hoped otherwise, but with the current crop of unimaginative leaders, that hope is diminishing.

      Be prepared – as Lord Baden Powell once said.

      • gator69 says:

        Left wing nuts have been running public schools in western countries since the 70’s…

        Did you mean since the 1870’s? 😉

        Actually it goes back even further. The Progressives of the mid 19th century were those who propelled the argument for prohibition. They had to get the kids in school first, then wait for them to become adults and pass their ill conceived ideas on to their children. It took about three generations of indoctrination before prohibition became the law of the land.

    • NancyG says:

      When my children were in school I went to Back to School Nights where the teachers would speak about what the students would be learning. Critical thinking was always on the list. On the surface it sounds like a good thing.

      I have come to realize that what I thought critical thinking was is not the same as what the teachers taught. My youngest is thoroughly indoctrinated in critical thinking.

      Her thinking is now critical of:

      The US.
      Wealth creators.
      Christians and Jews.
      Anyone that disagrees with her.

      The sad thing is that she is very intelligent. She took all AP classes in high school, and is double majoring in math and science in college. Yet she doesn’t seem to have common sense, a true intellectual.

      I’m hoping when she leaves college and gets out in the real world, with a real job, she will wake up. I love her, but she’s a trial to get along with.

  4. Robertv says:


    Maybe they can do a show in Boston right now.

    They probably have to change the name of the show. Naked and frozen to death.

  5. Albert Einstein: “Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I’m not sure about the former.”

  6. James Anderson says:

    They get this stupid by attending liberal schools.

  7. WillR says:

    Those paying attention will note that they are wearing mostly synthetic fibres. — So, dressed, in Oil they are protesting Coal. Interesting…

  8. Fred from Canuckistan says:

    Back in the day, they would have shown how pious they were by wearing hair shirts in public. They would show off like this to satisfy their inner narcissist.

    Nowadays, the wannabes take selfies, join a protest and get all feel good about themselves because they are “making a difference”.

    Still doesn’t change the fact they are clueless. Gaia must be so impressed with her flock.

  9. gator69 says:

    I don’t see any animal hides in that crowd of three, their very clothing was manufactured in a planet killing plant. And don’t get me started about those paper signs.

  10. SMS says:

    They are concerned about the water vapor being emitted from the stack behind them; totally unaware it isn’t pollution. I’m surprised they didn’t get their picture in front of the cooling towers. On a cold day like they are experiencing, cooling towers put out lots of visible water vapor.

  11. Ronald says:

    The problem is you cannot convince these people. Global warming is a religion and no amount of science will dissuade them from their beliefs. It is why they attack with ferverant zeal anyone who challenges them. In numerous arguments back and forth with people only one has ever changed his mind. I told him “I dont care if you believe me or not, but do your own math and analysis and come to your own conclusions. Just dont parrot what other people tell you.”

    The sad fact is very few people are trained to do data analysis. I do not mean complicated analysis either, but simple excel spreadsheets or even looking at unadjusted historical trends.

    Fortunately, the layman sees massive snow snowstorms, arctic blasts and doomsday scenarios by scientists and thinks these people are clueless. The layman also looks at his the cost it takes to fill up his car, the ethanol crap he has to put into his car, his increasing electricity bill, and his heating bill and wishes for warm weather.

    Talk to anyone up north ask ask if they want a later winter and earlier spring. Tell me what their response is.

    • rah says:

      As someone pointed out to me before. It may seem that your not making progress when you argue with the oh so faithful, but there are usually others that are listening to or reading the exchange who’s opinions can be influenced by the conversation.

      • Gail Combs says:

        Correct rah, The discussion is not for the brain dead leftist but for the fence sitters.

        From what I can tell, based on an old Rasmusen (?) poll, when the Tea Party first hit the scene (before the MSM evasculated it,) people were 30% democrat, 30% republican and 30% Tea Party. That means you have about 30% fence sitters and 30% brain dead leftists/trough feeders.

  12. Michael 2 says:

    How did they make that yellow snow?

  13. D. Self says:

    Libtards jump on any bandwagon their leaders tell them to. Doesn’t matter if it is true or not. My son deals with these brain dead idiots on a daily basis at school. When you have them cornered with logic they either change subjects or start the insults.

  14. richard says:

    you would think one of them would have the intelligence to say, ” hey guys, do you thing being wrapped up in thermals, standing on snow against a lovely blue sky, is a good way to protest against global warming”

  15. emsnews says:

    Even as it gets colder and colder…they don’t learn.

    But then this is all about EVOLUTION. Survival of the sane. I am hunkered down burning coal, yes, coal to keep alive as the temperatures won’t be above zero for a week.

    I burn wood normally. Only when it is zero do I burn coal (cheaper to burn wood from my own forest).

    It is going to be blasted cold all this week and my snow plow motor blew out and I have to drive it in for repairs tomorrow. Rats. We had a foot of snow last night.

    • NancyG says:

      Can I ask what you burn it in? I just put in a fireplace with heat pipes that naturally circulate the air. I intend to use wood in it. I can’t burn coal in it, right? I would need an enclosed type stove for that?

      • emsnews says:

        Absolutely you need a stove with a upper air/lower air flows with a grate that you can shake to get rid of the ashes and the door must seal. This burns the best. I have an ‘Englander’ stove in my living room that heats the entire three story building.

        The basement to 55 degrees and the attic rooms to room temperature.

  16. sully says:

    Got my thermals on now ready to start shoveling another 45cms of snow. I miss my sealskin coat, Bloody Nora.

  17. gator69 says:



    Great time for Darwin Award winners to be protesting coal plants.

  18. gator69 says:

    Looks like Rand Paul is now courting the 8 morons above…

    The senator from Kentucky and would-be 2016 contender has bucked the GOP establishment on an array of issues ranging from national security to drug policy. And in recent months, Paul has started to build a record suggesting that he supports action to cut air pollution and believes that man-made greenhouse-gas emissions are contributing to climate change.


    Maybe Rand was just jealous of the attention Mitt was getting.

  19. Don says:

    And they can vote. Take away their vote and who cares. Idiots.

    If that is true about Rand Paul, cross another off my list from the stupid party. Which is why between 1992 and 2008 I never voted Republican, went third party. I knew GW was a liberal. I only voted Romney in 2012 as protest against the weird little man in the White House.

    Looking back, we would have been better off had Gore won in 2000. Think about it.

  20. Pops says:

    Then there’s the disappointing, but, sadly, to be expected, article in the latest issue of National Geographic, “The War On Science”. I gave up Scientific American and Popular Science when they became egregious water carriers for fake science. I was hoping that NG would stick to what they do best rather this kind of shoddy advocacy.

    The article starts innocently enough, exploring the phenomenon that sometimes people reject what is known generally to be true, but quickly devolves into assertions that, for example, climate science has apparently explored all possibilities and has reached the final conclusion. If indeed that is the case, we should stop spending any money on it. But in fact climate scientists are, at best, busily engaged in devising Ptolemaic epicycles, or at worst, intent on engineering a reversal of the American Revolution.

    I expect that most scientists who are not climate researchers and who support AGW do so because they can’t fathom that the peer review process could ever fail them. Some day, this will be an somber case study into why process alone cannot protect us from the disingenuous and the dishonest. In the end, the logical conclusion is that there is no substitute for character.

    I have serious doubts that we can recover. There is hardly any field of endeavor today that is not tainted with corruption. I believe that the only path to a persistent solution lies in raising a generation with sufficient character to reject money and power and choose instead truth and honor. But how is that possible in our modern society in which children are raised in little day-care factories? Do they learn character in that setting, or do they learn the law of the jungle? How can anyone learn character when there is no longer a credible threat of burning in Hell for one’s sins, including the sin of dishonesty? While the threat is indeed real, modern society seems to be succeeding in dismissing it as nothing but fable and myth. This bodes ill for our future.

    In the meantime, the best we can do is to keep trying to expose the mistruths. Thank you all for your devoted efforts!

    • Gail Combs says:

      “….How can anyone learn character when there is no longer a credible threat of burning in Hell for one’s sins, including the sin of dishonesty?….”

      You have identified the problem but have not followed through to determine the actual cause. None of what we see is by chance.

      It is quite possible to raise children with good character without the threat of burning in Hell for one’s sins, My husband’s family is a good example. He and his brothers and nephews and nieces are all good honorable people and they were raised atheist. (They did however go to church as children and defend Christianity. “Atheists for Jesus” does exist.)

      My family on the other hand were raised devout Lutherians and are underhanded, sneaky and alround nasty people although very sucessful. My brother for example is a multimillionaire and he and his Roman Catholic wife killed off at least seven elderly relatives after convincing them to alter their wills at the last minute. (She bragged about it just before they killed off my Dad.)

      The key from what I can see is to teach NO! (palm of hand on butt of child) and actions have consequences at a very very early age. Wrapping kids in bubblewrap is the worse way to raise a child because they mentally REMAIN a Child. The Fabian/Progressives are very very well aware of this. Therefore you have the wealth removed form families plus feminism to drive women out of the home and into the work place.

      … Though I endorse the importance of women empowerment I strongly disagree to blindly follow, by choice or under pressure, the western policies designed by and for the industrialists. Probably you are not aware that most major women organizations in America were funded by Rockefeller Foundation who claims in their website, “By funding a strategic mix of organizations, institutions, and projects; the Foundation is fostering smart globalization.” Most feminist “Women Studies” funding comes from big foundations like Rockefeller Foundation, Ford Foundation, Carnegie Foundation etc and of course USAID, UNIFEM and UN.

      While trying to recruit Aaron Russo to CFR (Council on Foreign Relations), Nicholas Rockefeller told that his family foundation created women’s liberation using mass media control…..

      Behind the façade of “women’s rights”, Feminism teaches that heterosexual roles (wife, mother etc) are socially constructed by MEN and oppressive to WOMEN. This underscores the fact that feminism was created to destabilize the society and undermine the institution of family. Aaron Russo says, the two key reasons given by Nicholas Rockefeller were

      Before women’s lib we couldn’t tax half of the population

      Can indoctrinate kids in school at early ages. When there is no male figure in the family, kids start seeing the State as their family who provide and protect…..


      Then you have the trumped up childcare abuse to give the federal government an excuse to control daycare. link followed by the schools drugging gifted children with mind altering drugs. link

      As shown above iff you look you find the Rockefellers behind much of this going all the way back to the 1800s. In 1894, Dewey was appointed head of the department of philosophy, psychology and education at the University of Chicago. JD Rockefeller provided the funding. It allowed John Dewey to setup the Laboratory School where he could test the effects of the new psychology on real live children. Dewey was a founding member of the American Fabian Society.

      Then you have the changes in child rearing: The Hand that Rocked the Cradle:
      A Critical Analysis of Rockefeller Philanthropic Funding, 1920-1960

      Not nearly as good as the first article by that name I bookmarked years ago.

      Rockefeller Philanthropy and the Mental Hygiene Movement

      Journal of Educational Sociology, the primary question was not “What does the child learn in school?” but rather, “How does the child feel because of school?

      By the end of the 1920s LSRM and RF grants were funding child-study clinics at Iowa, Columbia, Berkeley, Toronto (where Blatz was employed), and Minnesota Universities – but it was at Yale University, the bastion of the mental hygiene movement since 1909, that the monographic equivalent to Parents’ MagazineInfant and Child in the Culture of Today. In his foreword for Infant and Child in the Culture of Today, Gesell acknowledged the substantial funding of the clinic by the RF [Rockefeller Foundation]: “We are fundamentally indebted to the Rockefeller Foundation, which over a period of years has given generous long range support to systematic investigations which underlie the present work.”[17]Life with Baby

      Earlier, in his Feeding Behavior of Infants: A Pediatric Approach to the Mental Hygiene of Early Lifeterra incognita,” Gesell argued, “it would…seem wiser to give the infant the lead in initiating variations from day to day because through these variations he tests and achieves his powers…which should be respected in the interest of his mental hygiene.”

      Following the progress of Gesell’s self-demand feeding concept within Parents’ Magazine illuminates the authority that Rockefeller philanthropy held over child-rearing advice.[30]Feeding Behavior of Infants[31]Parents’ Magazine[32]Parents’ Magazine in 1937 advocated that the feeding schedule should be left to the discretion of the child, rather than the mother or her doctor.

      During the next five years, the subject of infant feeding schedules appeared infrequently in the monthly magazine, occasionally referred to peripherally in articles critical of “super-efficiency schedules,” which, according to contributors, made motherhood as impersonal as office work….

      • Gail Combs says:

        I should also mention the changes that have torn apart the extended family. With women working their entire lives outside the home not only does this mean children get shuffled off to a government brainwashing center it also means the grandparents are sent off to be warehoused in retirement communities and finally elderly care facilities. This completely disrupts the transmittion of culture from generation to generation. On top of that our ‘villages’ the group of people we grew up with, work and play with has also been torn apart.

        I can think of no better way of distroying a country then by tearing apart the extended family/village and then flooding the country with foreigners who are told NOT to assimilate but to retain their own culture. AMERICAN SUICIDE — “A Plan to Destroy America.” A speech by former Colorado Governor Richard Lamm on multiculturalism

        None of this was by chance. FDR agreed to the destruction of the USA as a sovereign nation in the 1930s.
        ” Half a century ago, those who designed the post-war system — the United Nations, the Bretton Woods system, the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) — were deeply influenced by the shared lessons of history.

        All had lived through the chaos of the 1930s — when turning inwards led to economic depression, nationalism and war. All, including the defeated powers, agreed that the road to peace lay with building a new international order — and an approach to international relations that questioned the Westphalian, sacrosanct principle of sovereignty — Pascal Lamy two time Director-General of the World Trade Organization

        By the 1940s the attack on American culture was devised.

        ‘ The Socialist Revolution in the US cannot take place because there are too many small independent farmers there. Those people are the stability factor. We here in Russia must hurry while our government is stupid enough to not encourage and support the independent farmership.’ — V. Lenin, the founder of the Russian revolution

        SO the Fabian/Socialists decided to do away with America’s stability factor.

        History, HACCP and the Food Safety Con Job

        ….With World War II, America saw its agricultural system intentionally subjected to political policies that radically transformed it….

        This transformation was the result of organized plans developed by a group of highly powerful — though unelected — financial and industrial executives who wanted to drastically change agricultural practices in the US to better serve their collective corporate financial agenda. This group, called the Committee for Economic Development, was officially established in 1942 as a sister organization to the Council on Foreign Relations. CED has influenced US domestic policies in much the same way that the CFR has influenced the nation’s foreign policies. [CFR and CED are Miiner Round Tables BTW]

        Composed of chief executive officers and chairmen from the federal reserve, the banking industry, private equity firms, insurance companies, railroads, information technology firms, publishing companies, pharmaceutical companies, the oil and automotive industries, meat packing companies, retailers and assisted by university economists — representatives from every sector of the economy with the key exception of farmers themselves — CED determined that the problem with American agriculture was that there were too many farmers. But the CED had a “solution”: millions of farmers would just have to be eliminated

        A report published in 1962 entitled “An Adaptive Program for Agriculture”[3] is even more blunt in its objectives, leading Time Magazine to remark that CED had a plan for fixing the identified problem: “The essential fact to be faced, argues CED, is that with present high levels farm productivity, more labor is involved in agriculture production that the market demands — in short, there are too may farmers. To solve that problem, CED offers a program with three main prongs.”[4]

        Some of the report’s authors would go on to work in government to implement CED’s policy recommendations. Over the next five years, the political and economic establishment ensured the reduction of “excess human resources engaged in agriculture” by two million, or by 1/3 of their previous number….

        Their plan was so effective and so faithfully executed by its operatives in the US government that by 1974 the CED couldn’t help but congratulate itself in another agricultural report called “A New US Farm Policy for Changing World Food Needs” for the efficiency of the tactics they employed to drive farmers from their land.[5]

        The human cost of CED’s plans were exacting and enormous.

        CED’s plans resulted in widespread social upheaval throughout rural America, ripping apart the fabric of its society destroying its local economies. They also resulted in a massive migration to larger cities. The loss of a farm also means the loss of identity, and many farmers’ lives ended in suicide [6], not unlike farmers in India today who have been tricked into debt and desperation and can see no other way out….

        CED is still at work today destroying what is left of America’s independent farmers. Complete control of the food supply is another means of controling the population.

        The other factor was the 1980s Leveraged Buyout Feeding Frenzy that destroyed the stable, wealthy no-debt American owned mid-sized corporations.

        Of mergers and acquisitions each costing $1 million or more, there were just 10 in 1970; in 1980, there were 94; in 1986, there were 346. A third of such deals in the 1980’s were hostile. The 1980’s also saw a wave of giant leveraged buyouts. Mergers, acquisitions and L.B.O.’s, which had accounted for less than 5 percent of the profits of Wall Street brokerage houses in 1978, ballooned into an estimated 50 percent of profits by 1988…

        THROUGH ALL THIS, THE HISTORIC RELATIONSHIP between product and paper has been turned upside down. Investment bankers no longer think of themselves as working for the corporations with which they do business. These days, corporations seem to exist for the investment bankers….

        In fact, investment banks are replacing the publicly held industrial corporations as the largest and most powerful economic institutions in America….

        THERE ARE SIGNS THAT A VICIOUS spiral has begun, as each corporate player seeks to improve its standard of living at the expense of another’s.
        Corporate raiders transfer to themselves, and other shareholders, [and the banks who provided the fiat funny money] part of the income of employees by forcing the latter to agree to lower wages. January 29, 1989 http://www.nytimes.com/1989/01/29/magazine/leveraged-buyouts-american-pays-the-price.html?sec=&spon=&pagewanted=all New York Times

        With Clinton’s signing and Congress ratifying the World Trade Organization, what companies that are left in the USA have had to become ‘lean and mean’ Instead of a corporation looking at the person they hire out of high school or college as an ‘investment’ to be grown over the decades, people are now interchangable cogs. As E. M. Smith said, we have become itinerant workers moving from company to company and city to city. Now the largest employer is not a manufacturing corporation by Kelly Temp Service!

        Corporations no longer take the time to train employees they rather steal a train employee from someone else and then toss him when done. Of course once the itinerant white collar worker reaches his forties he is considered ‘too expensive’ and will have a tough time finding any job. Hence our unemployment rate of near 25%.

        • rah says:

          I thank goodness that our family has the resources for that not to happen. Yes we work but my wife just retired at age 59 and is available to babysit for our new Grand baby. My Mom has Alzheimer’s and my Dad’s state of health is such that both require continued care. But both are at home together with 24 hour care and we Kids and many of the grand kids are over there pretty frequently. The foundation for all of that is my Dad having established a very successful family business and investing wisely.

        • Gail Combs says:

          Good for you rah,

          What you have is what the Fabian progressives have set out to destroy.

  21. AndyG55 says:

    Actually, I see that picture as a sort of SOS…..

    They have NO COAL and are therefore freezing their butts off !!!

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 )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google 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