Monday, September 3, 2012

What's in a Name?

I have long wanted to address this issue. The left has for years proclaimed themselves to be "liberal". Recently many of the left have adopted the moniker "Progressive". Let us define what those words mean.
From Webster's Dictionary, Liberal:
a : of, relating to, or based on the liberal arts <liberal education> b archaic : of or befitting a man of free birth
a : marked by generosity : openhanded <a liberal giver> b : given or provided in a generous and openhanded way <a liberal meal> c : ample, full
obsolete : lacking moral restraint : licentious
: not literal or strict : loose <a liberal translation>
: broad-minded; especially : not bound by authoritarianism, orthodoxy, or traditional forms
a : of, favoring, or based upon the principles of liberalism b capitalized : of or constituting a political party advocating or associated with the principles of political liberalism; especially : of or constituting a political party in the United Kingdom associated with ideals of individual especially economic freedom, greater individual participation in government, and constitutional, political, and administrative reforms designed to secure these objectives
The first line talks of education, most people who call themselves "liberal" do think of themselves as educated, and they are born free (at least for now). 
The second definition speaks of generosity, well they are generous with the public's money (not so much with their own). 
The third definition is interesting, "lacking moral restraint", this one clearly fits the left (no group is more immoral than the ACLU, the charter of the left). 
The 4th definition is what I have always used to define "liberal", as in: "use a liberal amount of paint on the fence." 
The 5th definition is where most of the left sees themselves, they put on an air of sophistication and elitism. As though they were placed here on Earth to help the stupid and uninformed, to "take care" of those who simply cannot provide for themselves. "We can run the schools better, than private enterprise, we need a nanny state government.", this is the thinking of the Marxist. This is how we inherited the entitlement society. The left make the downtrodden believe that they cannot succeed and need the left to "help them". I call it pretentiousness, I call it immoral, inhumane and backwards. 
The last definition is where the left gets into trouble. A liberal is supposed to believe in more freedom, not less, more choices, not fewer. 

You cannot call yourself a "liberal" if you do not believe in:  school choice, property rights,  the Second Amendment and Capitalism (maximum freedom & choice). Yet the modern left is against all of those things.
What about the term "Progressive"? Webster's definition does not include anything relating to politics (except for the colloquial use of the word). Progress means to move forward, I know the  left believes they are moving forward, but Communism and Socialism were left on the "ash heap of history" by Reagan. We won the cold war. The commies lost, remember. "glasnost" and "Winds of Change"? Now it seems the left doesn't know who won....

These people who support socialism, collectivism, communism, marxism et al. are not "liberals" they are leftists, we should call them on the misuse of the term every chance we get. Do not let them hide behind a false moniker.

As Robert Heinlein said: "Political tags - such as royalist, communist, democrat, populist, fascist, liberal, conservative, and so forth - are never basic criteria. The human race divides politically into those who want people to be controlled and those who have no such desire."

Saturday, September 1, 2012

Climate Change?

The church of Environmentalism have changed the name of their beloved cause. Did you catch it? When the left discovered that the masses were not buying the concept of "Global Warming", they decided  to change the rallying cry to "Climate Change".  They have also adopted a tactic from the ADL in calling the non-believers "Climate Change Deniers". As though to not believe in climate change would be inhumane. If this does not fit the definition of a cult, I don't know what does.
The Earth's climate has always changed, always will. Forces much stronger than mankind have shaped this world and will continue to do so regardless of man's actions. Things like plate tectonics, which cause volcanoes to emerge and erupt, spewing millions of cubic tons of "harmful, green house gasses" into the atmosphere. Things like solar radiation & solar flares which have waxed and waned throughout the history of the Earth. This solar activity has the power to destroy our electrical infrastructure, heat the planet beyond comfort and kill us all from extreme radiation. Our planet's imperfect orbit and axis spin also affect the climate. It is by pure luck or divine intervention that we even survived this long.
Did you know that the Earth was once much warmer than it is now? 
During the age of the dinosaurs the Earth was perhaps 20 degrees warmer than today. Most dinosaurs were cold blooded and could not produce their own body heat. The would not survive the winters in much of the world. The climate the dinosaurs lived in was tropical, plant life was abundant, it was very similar to a green house.

 I'm sure you have heard of the Ice Ages that the earth has experienced (the Earth has experienced at least 5 Ice Ages).
While we may not know the exact causes of the ice ages, we do know that they happened.
How does the Church of Environmentalism explain those facts? Surely my F-350 didn't cause the extinction of the Dinosaur, did it? Another fact the environazis will not tell you: The Earth is still in an Ice Age. 

That's right, by definition an Ice Age has not ended until the polar caps are free of permanent ice. Just 15,000 years ago Canada, Sweden and the north Atlantic were covered with ice, Ice still exists year round on Antarctica, Greenland and most of the North Pole.

So.... we are still recovering from the last ice age, which means the Earth was on a course of warming before the industrialization of man. The Earth is still warming and the ice caps are going to melt whether we exhale Co2 or not....

Besides, let us consider what a warmer, greenhouse like Earth would mean: Plant life would be abundant, we could grow anything anywhere and faster than today. Growing seasons would be longer and famine would be a thing of the past. People would not die from cold weather related issues (more people die from cold exposure than heat exposure). We would need less clothing, meaning less production of materials to keep us warm. Our houses would not need the layers of insulation and gas, coal, oil or electricity to heat it. What is wrong with that?

This video clip have help you understand, told by the late, great George Carlin, see it on you tube here: