Why don't they actually move to a new planet

Why don't they actually move to a new planet

http://www.thenation.com/article/175816/movement-new-planet#axzz2d67RScgV

I was hoping.

"For environmentalists, we have a useful analogy close at hand. We're struggling to replace a brittle, top-heavy energy system, where a few huge power plants provide our electricity, with a dispersed and lightweight grid, where 10 million solar arrays on 10 million rooftops are linked together. The engineers call this "distributed generation," and it comes with a myriad of benefits. It's not as prone to catastrophic failure, for one. And it can make use of dispersed energy, instead of relying on a few pools of concentrated fuel. The same principle, it seems to me, applies to movements.

In the last few weeks, for instance, 350.org helped support a nationwide series of rallies called Summerheat. We didn't organize them ourselves. We knew great environmental justice groups all over the country, and we knew we could highlight their work, while making links between, say, standing up to a toxic Chevron refinery in Richmond, California, and standing up to the challenge of climate change.

From the shores of Lake Huron and Lake Michigan, where a tar-sands pipeline is proposed, to the Columbia River at Vancouver, Washington, where a big oil port is planned, from Utah's Colorado Plateau, where the first US tar-sands mine has been proposed, to the coal-fired power plant at Brayton Point on the Massachusetts coast and the fracking wells of rural Ohio—Summerheat demonstrated the local depth and global reach of this emerging fossil fuel resistance. I've had the pleasure of going to talk at all these places and more besides, but I wasn't crucial to any of them. I was, at best, a pollinator, not a queen bee."

Sorry this planet is taken. Could I interest you in Biosphere II?


Sent from my iPad

I am stupid, the majority is stupid so resistance is futile - Michael Cohen: In denial

I am stupid, the majority is stupid so resistance is futile - Michael Cohen: In denial


"Now, granted, if the GOP wants to knock themselves out (literally), who are we, as non-crazy and rational people, to stop them? Knock yourself out, GOP!"
He says this but the rest of the piece denies this.

"How to accomplish that, of course, is the hard part – particularly since Democrats control the Senate and the bill's namesake is sitting in the Oval Office. Indeed, because of this political reality, Republicans have appeared lately to be putting aside their strategy of shutting down the federal government in October unless Obamacare is defunded."

What if the government was shut down, and things don't fall apart. What if Obama misplays his hand and is caught shooting the hostages like last time?

"The incandescent rage from Tea Partiers at yet another bout of failed brinkmanship will not be directed at Obama; it will be directed at their own leaders.

It's already happening. This week, Tennessee Senator Lamar Alexander joined Lindsey Graham and Mitch McConnell in finding himself under assault from a Tea Party primary challenge. Alexander is hardly a moderate (he even penned an op-ed this week defending his conservative bonafides), but in the increasingly radicalized GOP, he's considered something of a Rino (Republican In Name Only). His crime: an apparent willingness to seek "compromise" with Democrats."

This is called representing your constituents. the Dims should try it. Compromise in this case is to capitulate on another unread, unconstitutional bundle of transfer of legislative authority to the federal clerks. This is a hill worth dying for. And who will be hurt most by a shutdown? The dependent. The states are willing to help the deserving poor, others may have a problem. And some dependent states will slide into bankruptcy. And some GOP get along get go along players will have to get a real job.

For those innocents that may be hurt, it is time to move to Texas.






Sent from my iPad

Limit the respect of science to that that is respectable

Limit the respect of science to that that is respectable
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-08-20/why-science-and-politics-don-t-mix.html
"If science expects to command respect, it should not only be aware of its own limits, but it also should be practiced to a high standard. Pinker seems to take for granted that it will be. He applauds the scientific temperament. The defining practices of science "are explicitly designed to circumvent the errors and sins to which scientists, being human, are vulnerable." Science is modest, you see -- intent on testing itself. Any movement that "fails to nurture opportunities for the falsification of its own beliefs" does not qualify as scientific, he says.
When it's done badly or pushes past its proper bounds yet still expects to command respect, that's scientism."


It appears some feel science can be cast in stone in support of their views. It can't.

Nor can science disprove religion. Science can only disprove theory's of science, and science can never prove anything.




Sent from my iPad

It is all about American powerlessness

It is all about American powerlessness
http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/middle_east/backing-egypts-generals-saudi-arabia-promises-to-fill-financial-void/2013/08/19/9d91384a-0901-11e3-9941-6711ed662e71_story.html

"But the unusually bold foray into foreign policy represents a big risk for the traditionally staid and cautious kingdom, jeopardizing its reputation as the leader of the Muslim world, reigniting a simmering power struggle with rivals Qatar and Turkey, and potentially harming its relationship with Washington."

The Obama team has been deliberately destroying the power of the US, this is the result: the cautious can no longer rely on an incompetent and powerless US.

Any organization that kills Christians, or any other group, should be the enemy of the US.

The administrations tilt toward the Muslim Brotherhood is not in the best interests of the US.


Sent from my iPad

The Liberty Amendments: Restoring the American Republic

The Liberty Amendments: Restoring the American Republic

http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2013/08/12/Interview-Mark-Levin-Liberty-Amendments-Breitbart-News

"I am not willing to say: it's all over, we're doomed, there is nothing we can do. I would rather say: let's fight. Let us do everything we can do to preserve this society right now, before it really is too late. Whether by Abraham Lincoln, or Joseph Story, or Ronald Reagan, we've been warned time and again that if America is to be destroyed, it will be destroyed from within.
The purpose of The Liberty Amendments is not only to give people hope but guidance. Here's hoping it helps breath life into a vigorous effort to reclaim our Constitution and restore the Republic."

Get the book, and read it

How very RINO of Chris Christie

How very RINO of Chris Christie
http://blogs.wsj.com/peggynoonan/2013/08/05/why-christie-is-wrong/

"It seems to me telling that he either doesn't have a logical argument or doesn't think he has to make it." :in the case of Democrats, it is both.

All Democrat speakers do this consistently, which is why they are said to be arguing emotion.

This is the very reason it is painful to read the mainstream press. I was turned off by this approach in the sixties era of hippie overreaching, and I dislike it intensely now.


Sent from my iPad

Time to shutdown the Federal Government

Time to shutdown the Federal Government
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/08/01/opinion/collins-politics-of-a-screeching-halt.html?ref=todayspaper&_r=0

"The fight is over whether the fortunes of the party would be improved if people connected it to the sudden closing of the national parks and the local passport office. "We've been down that road," said Senator Saxby Chambliss on MSNBC. "We shut down the government ...and we got our butts kicked over shutting down the government." Chambliss is 69 and about to retire. Nobody is ever going to invite him to give the keynote address at the Iowa Republican Party summer picnic."

It is different now. B. Obama has shown his destain for the law and as such has reviled himself as a threat to democracy. Continued lawlessness by multiple executive branches, make this a threat that can't be dealt with half measures. Defunding the government would create chaos but Obama can be counted on to retaliate in a most clumsy and transparent way possible.

We can survive a national park and passport office shutdown and what ever else Obama will throw at us. If we are clear about our reasons even the semi literate (i.e. Democrats), will support the effort. If the shutdown is long enough, the dependents of the Federal Government will be hurt more than the tax paying class.


Sent from my iPad

Dems are the "court" party

Dems are the "court" party
http://nationalreview.com/corner/354674/country-party-yuval-levin

Perhaps understandably, if not wisely, they recoil from all detailed policy prescriptions, seeing them as symptoms of an overactive urge to micromanage. But conservative successes have always been success of public policy, not of anti-policy. And their resistance to policy leaves them, and the Republican party, with an inadequate sense of the purpose and potential of political opposition. Here, too, not much is new under the sun. Here is Bolingbroke, in his 1736 letter "On the Spirit of Patriotism," laying out his vision of the country party in opposition:

I have observed, and your Lordship will have frequent occasions of observing, many persons who seem to think that opposition to an administration requires fewer preparatives, and less constant application than the conduct of it. Now, my Lord, I take this to be a gross error, and I am sure it has been a fatal one. It is one of those errors, and there are many such, which men impute to judgment, and which proceed from the defect of judgment, as this does from lightness, irresolution, laziness, and a false notion of opposition….

They who affect to head an opposition, or to make any considerable figure in it, must be equal at least to those whom they oppose; I do not say in parts only, but in application and industry, and the fruits of both, information, knowledge, and a certain constant preparedness for all the events that may arise. Every administration is a system of conduct: opposition, therefore, should be a system of conduct likewise; an opposite, but not a dependent system….

It follows from hence, that they who engage in opposition are under as great obligations, to prepare themselves to control, as they who serve the crown are under, to prepare themselves to carry on the administration: and that a party formed for this purpose, do not act like good citizens nor honest men, unless they propose true, as well as oppose false measures of government. Sure I am they do not act like wise men unless they act systematically, and unless they contrast, on every occasion, that scheme of policy which the public interest requires to be followed, with that which is suited to no interest but the private interest of the prince or his ministers. Cunning men (several such there are among you) will dislike this consequence, and object, that such a conduct would support, under the appearance of opposing, a weak and even a wicked administration; and that to proceed in this manner would be to give good counsel to a bad minister, and to extricate him out of distresses that ought to be improved to his ruin. But cunning pays no regard to virtue, and is but the low mimic of wisdom. It were easy to demonstrate what I have asserted concerning the duty of an opposing party. and I presume there is no need of labouring to prove, that a party who opposed, systematically, a wise to a silly, an honest to an iniquitous, scheme of government, would acquire greater reputation and strength, and arrive more surely at their end, than a party who opposed occasionally, as it were, without any common system, without any general concert, with little uniformity, little preparation, little perseverance, and as little knowledge or political capacity.

If the view of opposition he is criticizing doesn't make you think of today's Republican party, at least much of the time, then you're not paying attention.


Sent from my iPad