Tuesday, June 03, 2014

Hope And Change It Back

Obama said he would fundamentally transform the United States and that’s one promise he’s keeping. I hardly recognize it anymore.
Denee Mallon keeping vigil outside HHS

For example, The Associated Press reported last week about an Obama Administration Health and Human Services review board just ruling that we taxpayers can pay for a confused, 74-year-old army veteran who calls himself Denee Mallon to mutilate himself because he thinks he’s a woman. Medicare can fund his delusion, the Obama Administrations’s delusion, and the LGBTQ lobby’s delusion that he can fundamentally transform himself into a female. I don not share his delusion, but I’m forced to subsidize it. So are you.
The Associated Press didn’t report it that way though. The old wire service adheres to the GLAAD (Gay and Lesbian Advocates and Defenders) homofascist “Media Reference Guide” for reporting on such stories. The AP used an upbeat tone throughout in keeping with the fantasy that everything related to homosexuality is “gay” and “glad.” I reported on the GLAAD guide in my May 6th column in case you missed it. The confused Mr. Mallon was dutifully referred to by the AP as “her” and “she” even though he’s male. Previous, more sane HHS rulings against taxpayer funding for such mutilation were referred to as “unjustified.” GLAAD spokespersons were exclusively quoted by the AP on the ruling. Not quoted were critics like me, who are appalled at Obama Administration priorities that let hundreds of other veterans around the country die on fake waiting lists while the LGBTQ “community” celebrates the “groundbreaking decision that recognizes the procedures as a medically necessary and effective treatment for individuals who do not identify with their biological sex.” The AP reported as if no one could possibly object to any of this as an outrageous waste of taxpayer money.
Want another example? The Mainstream Media ignored, or gave scant attention to the report that the US economy shrank in the first quarter of 2014. Evidently the Administration’s “Recovery Summer” of 2010 that was to follow Obama’s trillion-dollar stimulus of borrowed money for allegedly “shovel-ready” projects will have to be postponed again for the fifth straight year. Obsequious mainstream media news outlets that didn't ignore it altogether dutifully reported the economic decline was caused by an extremely harsh, cold, snowy winter that froze America’s you-know-whats off. Our shrinking economy had nothing to do with Obama’s brilliant Keynesian, drunken-sailor spending policies. Oh no. The president is still doing everything he can to reverse failed Bush policies that are really to blame for the economic mess we’re in.
And what caused this extremely harsh winter that caused our economy to shrink? It was “Climate change,” which used to be called “global warming.” That name-change became necessary when global temperatures refused to conform to Al Gore’s predictions that they would continue to go up in our planetary “fever.” The foolishness is just too obvious when progressive geniuses attribute the record-breaking cold winter we just had to “global warming.” The polar ice cap was supposed to have disappeared by now, but it hasn’t. The Himalayan glaciers were supposed to melt and they’re not. The oceans were supposed to rise and they’re not.
But what good is it to point all this out? The debate is settled. Mr. Hope and Change told us so, and my continuing to ridicule the massive delusion of human-caused global warming just makes me a flat-earther, a “denier,” a crackpot. Some true-believing progressive think people like me should be arrested and imprisoned. Will the Obama Administration issue its own Media Guide for what can or cannot be said about the Chicken Little Climate Change Cult? Is the NSA monitoring crackpots? Is the IRS? Of course not. Why would I even think such things?
It’s not likely they worry about a small-time columnist like me in the northern New England sticks, but others have been feeling enormous pressure to go along with the “settled debate.” Earlier this month, eminent Swedish meteorologist Lennart Bengtsson was invited to join the London-based GWPF (Global Warming Policy Foundation) an organization that dares to question the on climate change “consensus.” Immediately, he was besieged by a firestorm of criticism from the American climate-change cultists so severe that he feared for his health and safety and resigned.
When National Review columnist Mark Steyn dared call the sacred hockey stick graph venerated by the Climate Change Cult fraudulent, CCC high priest Michael E. Mann filed suit against him for defamation. Steyn could have avoided the suit by apologizing, but he refused. Rather, he’s raising money for his defense because he wants to put Mann on the stand and question him about the dubious data behind his sacred graph while he’s under oath.
I can’t wait. Maybe after the trial, I can begin to recognize my country again.


Rich said...

Yes, Tom, we know you are one of the gullible suckers roped in by Big Oil's propaganda machine, and we know that you do not believe in science. At least I think you have got past the flat earth thing, and just maybe have evolved past the 6,000 year old earth theory. Goody for you.

And yes, we know about your weird sexual hang-up about gays and transgenders....heard it a million times, like a broken record.

So Al Gore was wrong, big whoop, he ain't no scientist. That is why I prefer to listen to what they have to say. So keep your blinders on to the disasters already occuring due to global warming, your descendents will be real proud of how you thought about their well-being.

So a college professor thinks global warming deniers should be jailed. Everyone is entitled to an opinion. Personally, I don't people should be jailed for their stupidity unless they are harming others.

I'll be back next week to see if you have anything at all new, it is is once again just a rehash of the same old far right, ditto head talking points.

Anonymous said...

Rich. You sound angry. Sometimes the truth hurts.

Captain MOOD said...

I'll only address one point here. I'd like to ask you to look into the research about transexuals, Tom. Rather than making uninformed, blanket statements about "delusional" trans people, maybe educate yourself on the topic a little more (you were an educator, yes?). Without appealing to sympathy, interesting research has been conducted into the masculinization and feminization of the human brain. It turns out that gender may indeed be a spectrum, dictated by the nuanced relationships between genetics, prenatal environment, perinatal environment, and early development. Trans individuals are more likely to have BNST (a sexually dimorphic part of the brain associated with gender identification) similar to the gender they identify with. Trans men who undergo sex change surgery do not experience a phantom limb syndrome, unlike cis men who are castrated. There is much more evidence. The reason why this has become more of an issue lately is that people are feeling more comfortable presenting how they feel than repressing it.

I'd love to talk more about this, as the brain is incredibly interesting to me. Just to make it clear, it is never as simple as XY and XX, or, penis and vagina.

Brian said...

I think you just made Tom's head spin with all that scientific talk. Keep in mind that Tom is a VERY shallow thinker. Thinking scientifically about this is much tougher to contemplate than the cave-manish "Ugh, me think that gross. Me no like so nobody should do."

Gary S. said...

Regarding the picture you included say "No global warming since 1998, maybe we are missing something"

Yes, you ARE missing something. It's called "reality". look into it. The top 10 warmest years in recorded history are ALL, I repeat- ALL, between the years of 1998 and 2014!

"but, but...that's not what Faux News told me!"

Listen to the scientists, not the politicians who have something to gain by giving misinformation.


The year 2013 tied with 2003 as the fourth warmest year globally since records began in 1880. The annually-averaged temperature across global land and ocean surfaces was 0.62°C (1.12°F) above the 20th century average and marks the 37th consecutive year (since 1976) that the annual temperature was above the long-term average. Currently, the warmest year on record is 2010, which was 0.66°C (1.19°F) above average. To date, including 2013, 9 of the 10 warmest years on record have occured during the 21st century. Only one year during the 20th century—1998—was warmer than 2013. The global annual temperature has increased at an average rate of 0.06°C (0.11°F) per decade since 1880 and at an average rate of 0.16°C (0.28°F) per decade since 1970.

Theo said...

I love the irony in the fact that a history teacher is going to look so incredibly naive and misinformed when judged by future historians!

He'll be in company with the "tobacco is safe" people, the "keep slavery going" people, the "women shouldn't vote" people, the "flat earth" people, and other infamous dullards.

It's fascinating visiting this site and getting to communicate with such a person!

Rich said...

Anon, how do I "sound" angry. If you actually could have heard me, you would have heard lots of chuckling and out-right bursts of laughter reading Tom's column! Every bit as funny as Stephen Colbert...but even more so because Tom just might actually be serious, and not spoofing dimwits.

Anonymous said...

Say....how come the de facto NH State newspaper has stopped using UPI as a "source" for their columns?
Must be the economics.


fsdf58989fd768f7ds78 said...

Say… how come the Kappa Sigma newsletter has never put an actual "photo" of a one-winged albatross on the cover of their newsletter? Must be the geology.


Mr. Babbitt said...

This Bengtsson story is just denialist yammering fodder.
The Global Warming Policy Foundation is an organization of mainly economists dedicated to mucking up the development and advancement of good science-based policy related to climate change. It is a denialist “think” tank.

What happened Lennart Bengtsson is simple to understand. A member of the scientific community who was retaining discredited ideas about climate change took one step too far, literally joining with the anti-science community. Colleagues complained about his choice, which is something they not only can, but should do. If the reports are correct, one of those individuals considered distancing himself from the GWPF, which is probably the ethical choice. In response, the denialist community, including Bengtsson, is calling foul. But really, what is the mainstream scientific community supposed to do? Is a professional gasp at a clearly inappropriate decision by a scientist really McCartyism? No, clearly it is not.
The short take on this is that Bengtsson ran into a wall of disgust from his colleagues which took him by surprise.
One of the complaints made be denialists is, apparently, that Bengtsson was given the shaft by the mainstream scientific community when a paper he submitted to IOP was rejected. Quotes from the peer reviewer comments were used to implicate IOP, the journal, and the reviewer in a McCarthy-istic campaign against Bengtsoon. It turns out that was a lie. The journal rejected Bengtsson’s paper because if fell short of standards, but encouraged him to bring it up to snuff with the implication they would look at it again.

And who are these people who allegedly attacked him? He doesn’t say, and most likely can’t because they don’t exist. Is there any evidence, besides LB’s vague claims? No. Until LB provides actual evidence, he is talking out of his behind.
We do know that his one falsifiable claim – that he had a paper denied for political reasons – has indeed been falsified. It was rejected because it was lousy. LB lied about why it was rejected. Why should we believe anything else he says about this at this point?

Common Sense said...

Scientific "proof" is very hard to come by. There is not even scientific proof that smoking causes cancer. This Bengtsson character is getting the same treatment by his collegues as would a doctor who joined a "Smoking is Healthy" organization. And rightly so.

Pedro said...

There are a ton of comparisons between this denial nonsense and the attempts of Tobacco companies to discredit scientists (and science in general). It eventually came to light that these scumbag tobacco executives knew the harmful effects of their product, even as they tried to stop the general public from finding out the facts, the same will eventually happen again with these even scummier Big Oil people. (They must get a kick out having so many foosish pawns to spread around information they themselves know to be untrue!)

Big Oil is doing exactly the same thing as the tobacco industry:

And people like Tom fall for it AGAIN!!!

"The industry built up networks of scientists sympathetic to its position, and their lawyers had a large role in determining what science would be pursued. The industry funded independent organisations to produce research that appeared separate from the industry and would boost its credibility. Industry organised symposiums were used to publish non-peer reviewed research. Unfavourable research conducted or proposed by industry scientists was prevented from becoming public.

CONCLUSIONS Industry documents illustrate a deliberate strategy to use scientific consultants to discredit the science on ETS. "


Nappy said...

How many climate sceptics does it take not to change a lightbulb?

100. One to say that the current absence of light is the result of natural solar cycles and the other 99 to disseminate this finding through their 'science organisations' and oil industry funded think tanks.

How many climate sceptics does it take to change a lightbulb?

None. It's too early to say if the lightbulb needs changing.

How many climate skeptics does it take to change a light bulb?

First off, the light bulb is not burned out, and even if it was,
it is not MY fault so why should I change it?
Besides, it is far too expensive for me to change a light blub.
Why are light Nazis always trying to get me to change my bulb?
Also, we are not taking into account all of the wonderful benefits of living in the dark!
Oh, and you don't see the Chinese changing THEIR light bulbs do you? Well do you?

Anonymous said...

"How many climate sceptics does it take not to change a lightbulb?
None, lightbulbs are ILLEGAL.

Huh? said...

"lightbulbs are ILLEGAL"

That is like saying cars are ILLEGAL because you can't buy one that gets 12 mpg anymore.

RL said...

Imagine if for some reason (say alternative energies had more money and lobbyists than Big Oil) that, despite the exact same science, it was conservatives sounding the global warming horn and liberals with their heads in the sand, does anybody believe that people like Tom would have the same opinion that they do now?

Not a chance in a million!

He would hear Tea Party leaders, Rush, Coulter, etc ranting about idiotic liberals ignoring the overwhelming evidence that the overwhelming majority of scientists and experts have presented, and Tom would be lock-step behind them.

So sad to see people blinded by political hatred.

R.L. said...

Imagine if for some reason (say alternative energies had more money and lobbyists than Big Oil) that, despite the exact same science, it was conservatives sounding the global warming horn and liberals with their heads in the sand, does anybody believe that people like Tom would have the same opinion that they do now?

Not a chance in a million!

He would hear Tea Party leaders, Rush, Coulter, etc ranting about idiotic liberals ignoring the overwhelming evidence that the overwhelming majority of scientists and experts have presented, and Tom would be lock-step behind them.

So sad to see people blinded by political hatred.

Rick said...

Yet another sound thrashing taken by Tom. Looking forward to his predictable, rehashed, Berdahl column!!