Saturday, April 03, 2010

Arrogance of people who are hung up on climate change

From New Wineskins

Hotter? Climate change. Colder? Climate change. Dryer? Climate change. Wetter? Climate change. More volatile? Climate change. More homogeneous and unrelenting? Climate change. The list goes on. Route number two leads back into the mirror. The logic behind the climate-change-explains-everything mantra boils down to:

Man caused it. Man can understand it. Man can fix it.

To be fair, various people generally supportive of this anything-but-God thrust will take exception to one or more of those three elements. In at least one, I sense the seeds of honest despair — something far healthier than hubris or denial, for unlike the river in Egypt (the Nile) it can and often does lead to God. (H/T: Anchoress).

In the main though, the logic boils down to man, man, man. And because “man” is not a monolithic organism but a collection of unique individuals, endowed by their Creator with free will though, it really amounts to: me, me, me.

I helped to cause climate change. I can understand it by reading the right articles, seeking out the “best” models and scientists and contributing to the valiant efforts of those seeking to understand everything about how all of the earths energy and water distribution systems work and interrelate to one another. And I can help “fix” it by supporting the right legislation, the right politicians, the right kind of science, etc.

It is the pinnacle of narcissism. It is the opposite of humility. As such, it is merely the latest popular mask on something extremely ancient: the idea that man can save himself. It is an expression of man’s pride in imagining that he has had a major influence on the very essence of physical Creation and that he can understand all the mysteries of it (implying that he knows what they all are — which would cause them to stop being mysteries, which would put him above the Most High).

It is also man’s pride in imagining he could even make a dent in a “problem” that would not be a problem if we were not so self-centered. How wild is it that man even seeks to define as a “problem” an issue so vast that each thought he thinks and each breath he takes in talking about it (because those burn energy and emit CO2) sets the whole thing back? In another guise it is man’s attempt to say:

Yeah, I know I’m sinning, but I have big plans, BIG PLANS to fix it once and for all. Just you wait and see. I’m drafting legislation now that will outlaw sin forever. We begin bombing sin in five minutes.

It is man’s hubris to even think to define climate change as a problem at all. What if it is God’s will to change the climate for reasons unknown (as appears to have been the case in the warm periods over the last few thousand years which enabled man to “go forth and multiply” rather than dying back, cold and sick in the rain and snow)?

What if, in some kinds of unusual weather, we are meant to see messages such as this one?: “Heavy rain blamed for collapse at Rome’s Nero’s palace… prompting fresh concerns over the stability of the ancient complex.” Stability indeed. The system he stood for is coming unglued even as it imagines it triumphs.

Tuesday, March 30, 2010

When Ignorance Tries to Run a Country

When you hire a bunch of rank amateurs to do a professional job, as we did when we hired Barack Obama to try to run this country you get rank ignorance and stupidity. They do not understand the situation

The White House political and legislative operations were said to be livid with the announcement by several large U.S. companies that they were taking multi-million or as much as a billion dollar charges because of the new health-care law
"These are Republican CEOs who are trying to embarrass the President and Democrats in general," says a White House legislative affairs staffer. "Where do you hear about this stuff? The Wall Street Journal editorial page and conservative websites. No one else picked up on this but you guys. It's BS."

On Friday White House chief of staff Rahm Emanuel and Obama senior advisor Valerie Jarrett were calling the CEOs and Washington office heads of the companies that took the financial hits and attacked them for doing so. One Washington office head said that the White House calls were accusatory and "downright rude."

"Most of these people [in the Administration] have never had a real job in their lives. They don't understand a thing about business, and that includes the President," says a senior lobbyist for one of the companies that announced the charge. "My CEO sat with the President over lunch with two other CEOs, and each of them tried to explain to the President what this bill would do to our companies and the economy in general. First the President didn't understand what they were talking about. Then he basically told my boss he was lying. Frankly my boss was embarrassed for him; he clearly had not been briefed and didn't know what was in the bill."

If you Hire Monkeys, you will live in a Zoo.

Monday, March 29, 2010

Heat is turned up on Obama....Maybe he ISN'T who he says he is?


At this point, every honest, decent member of Congress and the media, as well as ordinary citizens, knows that there was something putridly rotten about Obama's election. Not just the billion dollars in campaign donations, most of which are still unaccounted for but known to have flowed from foreign donors, many of them enemies of America. And not just the missing mountains of qualifying data that all presidential candidates are expected to produce, including:

  • His Illinois law license. Is he even a lawyer? Where is his supposed Harvard Law degree? Where are the papers he wrote in law school? Why does he not correct people when they say he was a law professor when he was never a professor but only a lecturer?

  • His Selective Service registration, which investigative-journalist and lawyer Debbie Schlussel has reported to be falsified, an accusation that Linda Bentley quite persuasively documented just the other day.

  • His visa, or more probably visas. After all, he did travel to Pakistan in 1981 when Americans were forbidden into that country. Did he use the Indonesian visa he got when he was a citizen of that country?

  • His school records from Indonesia and Hawaii.

  • His college transcripts from Occidental College in CA, Columbia College in NY, and Harvard Law School in MA.

  • His baptism certificate.

  • His Illinois State Senate records.

  • His law practice client list.

  • His records from the University of Chicago, where Obama, the instructor, supposedly taught.

Just as mysterious is the question of who exactly backed this virtually unknown neophyte senator with the paper-thin résumé and almost non-existent voting record — this man who had lifelong associations with countless dubious-if-not-criminal friends and associates, as well as political radicals.


Sunday, March 28, 2010

In Defense of Sarah Palin -- She understands that the U.S. has been a force for good in the world—which is more than can be said of our president.

By Norman Podhertz

Nothing annoys certain of my fellow conservative intellectuals more than when I remind them, as on occasion I mischievously do, that the derogatory things they say about Sarah Palin are uncannily similar to what many of their forebears once said about Ronald Reagan.

It's hard to imagine now, but 31 years ago, when I first announced that I was supporting Reagan in his bid for the 1980 Republican presidential nomination, I was routinely asked by friends on the right how I could possibly associate myself with this "airhead," this B movie star, who was not only stupid but incompetent. They readily acknowledged that his political views were on the whole close to ours, but the embarrassing primitivism with which he expressed them only served, they said, to undermine their credibility. In any case, his base was so narrow that he had no chance of rescuing us from the disastrous administration of Jimmy Carter.

Now I knew Ronald Reagan, and Sarah Palin is no Ronald Reagan. Then again, the first time I met Reagan all he talked about was the money he had saved the taxpayers as governor of California by changing the size of the folders used for storing the state's files. So nonplussed was I by the delight he showed at this great achievement that I came close to thinking that my friends were right and that I had made a mistake in supporting him. Ultimately, of course, we all wound up regarding him as a great man, but in 1979 none of us would have dreamed that this would be how we would feel only a few years later.

Read the Whole Thing..............