• Pragerisms

    For a more comprehensive list of Pragerisms visit
    Dennis Prager Wisdom.

    • "The left is far more interested in gaining power than in creating wealth."
    • "Without wisdom, goodness is worthless."
    • "I prefer clarity to agreement."
    • "First tell the truth, then state your opinion."
    • "Being on the Left means never having to say you're sorry."
    • "If you don't fight evil, you fight gobal warming."
    • "There are things that are so dumb, you have to learn them."
  • Liberalism’s Seven Deadly Sins

    • Sexism
    • Intolerance
    • Xenophobia
    • Racism
    • Islamophobia
    • Bigotry
    • Homophobia

    A liberal need only accuse you of one of the above in order to end all discussion and excuse himself from further elucidation of his position.

  • Glenn’s Reading List for Die-Hard Pragerites

    • Bolton, John - Surrender is not an Option
    • Bruce, Tammy - The Thought Police; The New American Revolution; The Death of Right and Wrong
    • Charen, Mona - DoGooders:How Liberals Hurt Those They Claim to Help
    • Coulter, Ann - If Democrats Had Any Brains, They'd Be Republicans; Slander
    • Dalrymple, Theodore - In Praise of Prejudice; Our Culture, What's Left of It
    • Doyle, William - Inside the Oval Office
    • Elder, Larry - Stupid Black Men: How to Play the Race Card--and Lose
    • Frankl, Victor - Man's Search for Meaning
    • Flynn, Daniel - Intellectual Morons
    • Fund, John - Stealing Elections
    • Friedman, George - America's Secret War
    • Goldberg, Bernard - Bias; Arrogance
    • Goldberg, Jonah - Liberal Fascism
    • Herson, James - Tales from the Left Coast
    • Horowitz, David - Left Illusions; The Professors
    • Klein, Edward - The Truth about Hillary
    • Mnookin, Seth - Hard News: Twenty-one Brutal Months at The New York Times and How They Changed the American Media
    • Morris, Dick - Because He Could; Rewriting History
    • O'Beirne, Kate - Women Who Make the World Worse
    • Olson, Barbara - The Final Days: The Last, Desperate Abuses of Power by the Clinton White House
    • O'Neill, John - Unfit For Command
    • Piereson, James - Camelot and the Cultural Revolution: How the Assassination of John F. Kennedy Shattered American Liberalism
    • Prager, Dennis - Think A Second Time
    • Sharansky, Natan - The Case for Democracy
    • Stein, Ben - Can America Survive? The Rage of the Left, the Truth, and What to Do About It
    • Steyn, Mark - America Alone
    • Stephanopolous, George - All Too Human
    • Thomas, Clarence - My Grandfather's Son
    • Timmerman, Kenneth - Shadow Warriors
    • Williams, Juan - Enough: The Phony Leaders, Dead-End Movements, and Culture of Failure That Are Undermining Black America--and What We Can Do About It
    • Wright, Lawrence - The Looming Tower
  • Advertisements

The Flaky, Feminized Dance Called Trudeau’s Canada

The Embarrassing, Hilarious, Can’t-Look-Away Trudeau Show

by Fay Voshell   at  American Thinker

See also: Silly costumes were the least problem with Justin Trudeau’s ‘disaster trip’ to India

Imagine the reaction of the media if President Trump donned lederhosen and tried to do a German folk dance during a trip to meet with Germany’s Angela Merkel.  Or imagine if India’s president, Ram Nath Kovind, arrived for a state visit to Canada dressed as a red-jacketed Canadian Mountie or as a plaid-shirted lumberjack carrying an axe.

The equivalent of the above is pretty much what Canada’s Prime Minister Justin Trudeau attempted during his recent trip to India, where he made himself a laughingstock because of his fervid embrace of the religion of multiculturalism.


was quite a show.  Nothing was too much for Trudeau to do if it buttressed his devotion to national traditions other than the traditions of his own country, which is supposed to be Canada.  Trudeau acted as if he were a representative of India, not Canada.  He dressed like an Indian, tried to dance like an Indian, gestured like an Indian.

Nothing was off limits when it came to his acting, either.  As Business Insider reported, “At one point, Trudeau, wearing traditional dress, broke into the Indian dance called the Bhangra, to a mixed reaction on Twitter.”

Oh, it must have been something to see.  Or not.

Some observers, such as Omar Abdullah, former chief minister of Jammu and Kashmir, apparently had had enough of the Trudeau show after three days of the prime minster decking himself out in splendid Indian dress and prancing through the steps of the Bhangra.  Abdullah tweeted, “Is this choreographed cuteness all just a bit much now?  Also, FYI we Indians don’t dress like this every day sir, not even in Bollywood.”

Underlying Trudeau’s obvious cultural appropriation of India’s tradition of sartorial splendor is the belief that identification with any culture but the Western tradition is virtuous.  Pretending to be an Indian from the upper classes or a member of Bollywood is supposedly better than being dressed in a suit or a tuxedo, both of which are ordinary Western dress but both of which may have been deemed by Trudeau as giving off vibes of Western imperialism.

He erred even more by hauling his entire family onto the multiculturalist stage, having them all dress in Indian attire while assuming the gestures typical of an Indian greeting.  It all looked like a badly staged version of the Von Trapp family done Indian style.  Thankfully, the family didn’t sing.

Perhaps some of the messages were unintentional, but at the heart of the Trudeau show is the idea that imitation is the sincerest form of diplomacy.

It isn’t.

On the contrary, the whole cringe-inducing episode had to have been humiliating for many of the people of Canada, including some of the immigrants from India who are part of Canada’s population.  What are they to think of their prime minister’s ridiculous performances?  Surely, they have seen that Trudeau’s efforts were not truly diplomatic.  Surely, they have noted the insulting fakery.  This is to say nothing of the very bad acting and dancing.

There are some lessons to be learned from Trudeau’s bad stagecraft.

First, ersatz pretenses of multiculturalism coupled with bad acting should never be part of diplomacy.  It is diplomatic to understand the history of the nation one is visiting.  It is gracious diplomacy to avoid egregious offenses by learning what the host country considers good manners.  It is not good diplomacy to present oneself as an imitation citizen of the country that has invited you to visit.

Second, to state the obvious: Mr. Trudeau supposedly was visiting India to represent Canada, not India itself.  Canada has its own integrity and national traditions, which traditions are the ones Mr. Trudeau is supposed to represent.  Some of those traditions include parliamentary government vested in the national interests of Canada, which still technically is part of the British Commonwealth.  In other words, Canada is Western in its history, not Indian.  Mr. Trudeau is a Westerner, though he appears either not to know it or not to like it.

Third, Trudeau’s attachment to the ideals of globalism is obvious.  Even if it is at the expense of his own country, he apparently is committed to following the old adage, “When in Rome, do as the Romans do.”  If he were in Tibet, he would probably attempt to take up a prayer wheel and learn throat-singing.  If he were in Japan, he might be inclined to wear a samurai costume and thrum away on the shamisen.  Were he in Australia, he might try the “Kangaroo Hop” on the didgeridoo.  Nor would he neglect trying out the melodious flugelhorn while in the Swiss alps.

In any case, he has revealed himself as a chameleon who will try to assume the cultural identity of any nation he visits – any nation other than Canada.

In view of his bending over backward to be all things to all people, we can hazard a guess that as Trudeau returns to Canada, he will doubtless continue to try to be all things to all peoplekind.




Ten Most Fascistic “Colleges” in Leftist Dictating America Today

The 10 worst colleges for free speech: 2018

By  February 12, 2018

Every year, FIRE chooses the 10 worst colleges for free speech — and unfortunately, 2017 left us with plenty of options: Campuses were rocked by violent mob censorship, monitored by bias response teams, plagued by free speech zones, and beset by far too many disinvitation attempts. Although the number of colleges with the most restrictive speech codes has continued to decline, 90 percent of schools still maintain codes that either clearly restrict or could too easily be used to restrict free speech.

Today, we present our 2018 list of the 10 worst colleges for free speech. As always, our list is presented in no particular order, and it includes both public and private institutions. Public colleges and universities are bound by the First Amendment; the private colleges on this list, though not required by the Constitution to protect student and faculty speech rights, explicitly promise to do so.

A new feature of this year’s list is our Lifetime Censorship Award. This “honor” goes to the one college or university that is so frequently discussed as a contender for our annual “worst colleges for free speech” list that it deserves special recognition. This year, that school is DePaul University.

Are you a student or faculty member whose free speech rights are imperiled on campus? Submit a case to FIRE. Also, check out FIRE’s Guides to Student Rights on Campus to help you fight for free speech, due process, religious liberty, and more.

Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute (Troy, N.Y.)

Rensselar EMPAC (Credit: UpstateNYer)

Rensselaer Student Union (Credit: FIRE)

Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, nestled in eastern New York, has a long history of censoring anything controversial, from criticism of the Iraq War to critics of that criticism. In 2017, RPI continued that tradition, working (literally) day and night to censor students. The target? Students who criticized what they perceive to be RPI administrators’ attempts to take over the Rensselaer Union — an organization and facility that has been independently operated by RPI students for over a century.

Last fall, students were required to ask administrators’ permission to hold a peaceful demonstration outside a black-tie fundraiser held by RPI’s president, Shirley Ann Jackson. Administrators denied that request — the second time they had denied “Save the Union” advocates permission to hold a demonstration. To add insult to injury, RPI administrators tore down “Save the Union” signs before dawn — an act of censorship caught on video — and erected fences to keep student protesters away from would-be donors.

After students peacefully demonstrated anyway, RPI brought charges against “leaders” of the demonstration — identified as “leaders” on the basis that they spoke to local television stations. One student was charged under a policy barring commercial solicitation for distributing a letter criticizing the administration. These charges were dropped only after months of criticism from FIRE.

RPI’s conduct earned it letters from both FIRE and the New York Civil Liberties Union, which criticized RPI’s use of an “apparently non-existent policy” to penalize critics of the administration. In response to FIRE, RPI claimed student expression would not be punished “provided it is within the realm of civil discourse (e.g., not hate speech or threatening).” RPI has no written policy requiring “civil discourse,” but it does have a “red light” speech code rating from FIRE for other policies restricting student expression.


Drexel University (Philadelphia, Pa.)


Drexel University Main Building

Drexel University makes promises to protect professors’ speech rights, but the university’s treatment of Associate Professor George Ciccariello-Maher makes clear it does not keep them.

The trouble for Ciccariello-Maher began on Dec. 24, 2016, when he tweeted “All I Want For Christmas is White Genocide,” which he said was “a satirical tweet about an imaginary concept, ‘white genocide.’” Perhaps predictably, a backlash ensued — one that was fueled in significant part by accounts operated by the Russia-based and Kremlin-linked Internet Research Agency. Drexel initially promised Ciccariello-Maher that he would not face punishment for the tweet, but the red light institution quietly launched an investigation anyway.

FIRE wrote to Drexel on June 2, 2017, reminding the university of its commitments to free expression and warning that its investigation of Ciccariello-Maher contradicted those promises. Rather than admit its mistake, Drexel refused to drop its investigation and then barred Ciccariello-Maher from campus in October, citing threats from those outraged by his tweets. When FIRE asked Drexel to provide basic information regarding its decision to ban Ciccariello-Maher, the university refused. Finally, one year after the controversy began, Ciccariello-Maher resigned from his “unsustainable” position, noting, “We are all a single outrage campaign away from having no rights at all, as my case and many others make clear.”

Ciccariello-Maher was right to say there are “many others” like him. Just last year, faculty at schools including the University of TampaEssex County CollegeMontclair State UniversityCalifornia State University, Fresno, and Trinity College faced suspensions, investigations, and even firings in response to outrage campaigns.


Harvard University (Cambridge, Mass.)

harvard panorama Marcio Jose Bastos Silva Shutterstock.com feat

Widener Library at Harvard (Credit: Marcio Jose Bastos Silva / Shutterstock)

To make the list for the fourth time, all Harvard University really had to do was continue unabated on the campaign against free association that landed it on this list last year.

Harvard did just that, and the blacklist policy to deny certain academic and leadership privileges to members of single-gender groups like sororities, fraternities, and final clubs is still on track to be implemented this semester. But, always the overachievers, Harvard’s administration cemented their case with two additional free speech controversies.

First, Harvard rescinded offers of admission from 10 students for sharing joke images in a private group chat on Facebook. Had those students matriculated to Harvard, subjecting them to punishment would have been in violation of Harvard policy. But as the students had only been admitted, Harvard, under the cover of that technicality, deemed them unworthy of protection.

Ironically, this happened only a week after we praised Harvard President Drew Faust for a powerful commencement address in support of free speech on college campuses. She said, in part: “Our values and our theory of education rest on the assumption that members of our community will take the risk of speaking and will actively compete in our wild rumpus of argument and ideas. It requires them as well to be fearless in face of argument or challenge or even verbal insult.”

Harvard’s administration had another opportunity to demonstrate that very same fearlessness when it received criticism from the intelligence community for extending a visiting fellowship to court-martialed former U.S. intelligence analyst Chelsea Manning. Instead, it almost immediately buckled to pressure and revoked the fellowship. Harvard’s speed to cave under external criticism further undermines its commitment to the “wild rumpus of ideas.”

With President Faust resigning at the conclusion of this academic year, we hope that her successor, former Tufts University President Lawrence Bacow, will address Harvard’s red light speech code rating and demonstrate the commitment to defending free speech that Faust’s administration lacked. However, given that Bacow’s tenure at Tufts was marred by several speech controversies of its own, we are less than optimistic.


Los Angeles Community College District (Los Angeles, Calif.)

According to the Los Angeles Community College District, all of the grounds on its nine campuses — comprising the largest community college district in the country — are off-limits to free speech, except administratively designated “free speech zones.” The breadth and severity of its speech restrictions, affecting over 150,000 students in the district, earns LACCD a spot on this year’s list.

Last year, a student at one district campus, Los Angeles Pierce College, decided to push back. On March 28, 2017, Pierce student Kevin Shaw filed a lawsuit with FIRE’s help against administrators at LACCD and Pierce College after he was told he could not hand out Spanish-language copies of the U.S. Constitution on behalf of Young Americans for Liberty outside the college’s tiny free speech zone. The zone is about the size of three parking spaces and makes up about .003 percent of the campus. The U.S. Department of Justice filed a statement of interest in Shaw’s case, arguing that he successfully alleged First Amendment violations.

Just last month, the court rejected LACCD administrators’ attempt to dismiss Shaw’s lawsuit, which is part of our Stand Up For Speech Litigation Project. In an opinion from the United States District Court for the Central District of California, the court ruled that open, outdoor areas of Pierce’s campus are public forums for student speech, whether or not school policy attempts to label them otherwise.

Fordham University (New York, N.Y.)


Fordham Rose Hill Campus (Credit: Fordham.edu)

What’s worse than making this list in 2017? Finding yourself back on it in 2018.

In late 2016, Fordham University’s United Student Government Senate and Executive Board granted approval to a prospective chapter of Students for Justice in Palestine. However, Dean of Students Keith Eldredge overruled the USG and denied recognition to SJP, writing that he “cannot support an organization whose sole purpose is advocating political goals of a specific group, and against a specific country” and that “the Israeli-Palestinian conflict … often leads to polarization rather than dialogue.”

On Jan. 25, 2017, FIRE and the National Coalition Against Censorship wrote to Fordham (which also earns a red light speech code rating from FIRE), calling on the university to reverse its rejection of SJP in keeping with its free speech promises. Instead, Fordham doubled down and even went so far as to sanction students protesting the university’s decision, which cemented its place on last year’s “10 Worst” list.

But the story didn’t end there. Members of the prospective SJP chapter fought back and fileda lawsuit against Fordham on April 26, 2017. Again, rather than admitting its errors, Fordham continued to stand by its disregard for free association, earning its title as one of 2018’s worst. On Jan. 3, Fordham defended its actions in court by offering a shifting array of justifications for its behavior, each less believable than the last, eventually claiming that the students could start a group, so long as it didn’t use the “Students for Justice in Palestine” name — a claim that directly contradicts the university’s written explanations for why it denied official recognition to the group.


 Click below to become better acquainted with the rest of the ten most Soviet fascist institutions  preaching  hate  American males lectures and studies on behalf of today’s feminazis,  feminists, black racists, standard communists and atheists of all sexes, colors, shapes, and sizes:


The Fascism of today’s American Press

Fascism:  any movement, tendency, or ideology that favors dictatorial government, centralized control of private enterprise, repression of all opposition.

Accordingly, name one relatively  well read American  news publication that doesn’t hammer President Donald J. Trump nearly every issue!

The overwhelming majority of national “news” from  newspapers in America today is sold by college-crippled  leftist  professionals from  three fascistic national  American   Obamaling loving,  Soviet-like ‘journals’…… The New York Times, The Washington Post, and the Los Angeles Times.

Nearly all of major American television sources from coast to coast  also sell only  college-crippled, Obamaling loving, fascistic Soviet-like,   one Party politics whether news telling or “humor” whether news or for laughs.

Nearly all of our America’s educational institutions have also  become fascistic screamers and atheist preachers “religiously” selling leftism, antiAmericanism,  projecting their anti-truths to destroy the truths of  present and past.   In addition they  sell the arrival of twenty million foreigners, nearly all unlearned,  unskilled, to vote whether legal or not, to secure one Party  fascistic control of our already weakened and poorly educated America already owned in their Sanctuary Cities and Sanctuary California, Oregon, and Washington to be…. where the know-better Hillary  “Democrat” neoStalinists can dictate One Party  life at every  level “for the good of the country”.

Our courageous, bright, skilled problem solver, totally American, skilled  builder  President Donald J. Trump, has had to endure leftism’s   poison  and evil from  every Obamaling fascism’s corner in America, about 99% Democrat Party and 30 % Romney type Republican Party aristocrats who apparently  went to school or college to study  how they can best learn to hate honesty, forthrightness, courage,  and white males in four years or less.   Fasicism needs them!




Craig Rucker, Director of the Committee for a Constructive Tomorrow,  the major watchdog reporting on  the Al Gore man made global warming fraud claims  sent the following report:

Gore: Warming made it cold

Al Gore knew it all along.

Global warming would cause “bitter cold.”

Does anyone doubt for a second if the temperature was above average, Gore would claim that as proof of global warming as well?

The man has no shame.

CFACT’s Marc Morano has full details at Climate Depot.  His report is currently on Drudge!

Neither warm, nor cold days prove or disprove the theory of global warming.  They are weather, not climate.  What we do know for certain is that the climate computer models that predict global warming consistently project a warmer world than observations show. We also know that if the models were correct (they never have been), they reveal the solutions proposed by Gore and other warming campaigners to be ineffective, unfair and their benefits (if any) to not exceed their costs.

Marc Morano posted a “tweet” from climate scientist Roger Pielke, Sr. “For those who claim USA/Canada nor’easter is stronger because of ‘global warming’, they apparently do not realize that it’s so strong because of especially strong horizontal temperature gradient in troposphere. It ‘bombed’ because of usually cold air!”   Al Gore take note.

Marc reminds us in his report that scientists from team warming infamously predicted that snow would be a “thing of the past” by now.

You’d think if we are going to surrender our freedom and prosperity to these people, they’d get it right some time, wouldn’t you?……….

Glenn’s comment:   Outside of travels to discover Europe, Mexico, and our United States and my two years in military service, I, since birth, have lived in the north land here in Minnesota.   When in   third grade,  I did “by heart” and chalk, draw a map of the United States on teacher, Mrs. Jaeger’s blackboard, including the borders of all the states West of the Mississippi River.    I had already collected about 150 road maps from AAA, Texaco, Shell, Skelly,  Standard, Deep Rock, and more ‘filling stations’.   They were  free.   I still have them all.

It was the same year I learned that our Minnesota, once upon a time,  was covered deep….. under hundreds of feet of ice called “glaciers”.   I was told they came and went in three or four stages, the most recent sometime around 13,000 years ago.   It’s the cause why so much of  our left wing “goopher” land surface is covered with so much stone, including all those “uge” ones in and around our Duluth.


When studying geology while in college sixty years ago,  I was  reminded that until that cataclysmic disaster when that a much  “uger” piece of rock fell from outer space   into our Gulf of Mexico  some 65,000,000 years ago, killing all of the dinosaurs, including Tyranosaurus Rex,  and nearly everything else roaming around the Dakotas and the rest of the world for millions of years.

I doubt crooked Hillary, her feminist allies  and other leftist cohorts celebrating their  21st century crime time know much about real glaciers….or the outdoors in general.   So many of them are law graduates where  fascists are trained.



The vast majority of today’s  Americans, even ones who vote in presidential elections, are ignorant, nearly vacant, regarding Earth’s outdoors…..even the differences between a leaf and a leaflet.   Today’s college age know nothing about Earth’s yesterdays whether the human world or the world human’s live in……unless you are in your 80s and went to schools,  elementary and secondary,  schooled by  disciplinarians, brilliantly educated old maids, and attended universities before the Liberal, Leftist, Fascist, Feminist,  and Black Racist era of today.

Two plus two still equaled four back then, not five on Tuesdays or two on Fridays…..depending upon ones mood, regardless of sex or which drugs one might be taking.

Younger Americans know little about the indoors  these days.    Whatever breaths of knowledge wisp through their ears, they never quite reach the brain, for learning knowledge, they are told by their today’s fascist instructors, LEARNING KNOWLEDGE IS SO YESTERDAY….AND SO VERY, VERY MALE….

Drugs are popular among many young circles.   So  many of the drugs they prefer or are programmed to consumer for joy and pleasure,  also make them  numb regarding Truth, and ignorant regarding deceit,  they become Democrats of the fascist kind.

Today, Americans, especially the  purist leftists  under age 70 come to rely solely on cellphones to lighten their day.

I have renewed by subscription to the Wall Street Journal having dumped it from my collection of knowledge gathering due to   their nearly universal fascistic hate for our tremendously skilled,  Donald” Trump, as a candidate for our American presidency.  I received my second copy, today…the Saturday one.   On Page A2 of the Journal’s US NEWS page two section, identified as THE NUMBERS by Jo Craven McGinty is the main headline of the page,  “BLOWING LEAVES, AND POLLUTION”.

Beside a snapshot of this Harvardish-appearing Jo, begin the paragraphs of words of her outdoor epistle from the universal left and its fascists:     “Once autumn leaves are down, landscapers with leaf blowers strapped to their backs pour into America’s neighborhoods like hornets from a hive.”   Jo continues:

“Which raises an interesting question:  How much pollution does a leaf blower emit?  If it’s gas-powered, the short answer is more than a car, a truck or any other modern passenger vehicle…..But because vehicles outnumber the nation’s 12 million leaf blowers by about 224 million, they still beat out the dirtier engines in total emissions……These small engines are notoriously high polluters.  But because there are fewer of hem compared to cars and trucks, they don’t  emit as much total pollution,” said John Volckens, a professor of mechanical engineering at Colorado State University”……

and then Journal leaf digger, Jo, refers to U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and Quiet Communities, a non-profit that advocates for quieter and cleaner lawn maintenance, estimated that in 2011 there were nearly leaf blowers and vacuums in the country, a figure they projected would grow to about 12 million by 2018……The EPA”, Jo continues, “has regulated leaf blowers  and other small, nonroad spark-ignition engines since 1997.  The machines are divided into two categories:  hand-held equipment, such as leaf blowers and chain saws; and non-handheld equipment, such as leaf blowers and chain saws and nonhandheld equipment, such as lawn mowers and generators.”…..and she continues for three more columns covering a half page…again, on page 2 of this Saturday’s Wall Street Journal.

One of the most serious problems facing the American newspaper reader these days of the ObamaEra, is those allegedly reporting the news are nearly vacant of knowledge at any and all levels……This was true of “J” schools at my time of college learnings in the 1950s and again in the late 1960s when I was amassing my undergraduate and graduate learnings and degrees…in Geography, in Russian, in Soviet Studies, and in Horticulture…..before school   grades had lost their meaning!

Journalists then, now,  and likely forevermore, aren’t trained to gather fields of knowledge. They still are programmed to develop style of writing and today also learn to  be leftists….fascists….feminists.

A couple of generations ago they were expected to learn ethics and be programmed to seek and display TRUTH in  reporting.  If they wanted to add scholastic knowledge to their trade, they’d have to get another ‘bachelor’ degree….but don’t use that word, ‘bachelor’ among today’s academes.

During my World War II years in elementary school, I lived in a very modest neighborhood in St. Paul, Minnesota at a time when temperatures DID reach 28 to 32 degrees below zero as common  practice in winter.   And then came our recent, wonderful sixty year  bit of global warming   making  this newer Minnesota “kinder and gentler because of  its warming”.   Until the 1950s our urban neighborhoods were heated by coal furnaces.    Oil went to the military.    Our ‘garden’ snow was as clean as it is today….but streets and roadways were uglier.   Our today’s Twin City population  is  more than three times what it was during the War…..and,

Despite the “Blowing Leaves, and Pollution”, Ms. McGinty rages about in her writings, from where does she collect TRUTH and its real CONSEQUENCES about the horrors of leaves and dirty blowers?  Where is her “blowing-leaves” fogs of poison in our urban areas?  Most of America IS urban, yes, and totally ignorant of the actual Nature around them.

It was charged recently in political America, that ONLY THE DEPLORABLE, THE DESPICABLE AND THE INCORRIGIBLE would be dumb enough to work the soil or appear to be people such as those who do.

Did Ms. McGinty amass her Blowing Leaves, and Pollution article from personal experience?  Of  course not!   What pool then, did her article’s  gossip of leaf knowledge come from beyond the palaces of today’s leftist Government Bureaucracies and their politicians?

Global warming as politicized today is a fraud….COLD, NOT HEAT , IS THE DESTRUCTIVE DESTINY OF OUR EARTH’S  FUTURE!  Don’t rely on journalists for Truth telling.   They, today in the general,  prefer politics to ethics.  It’s more profitable!







Global Warming NOT Warming

(Perhaps the greatest racket of our life time is the corruption of the UN racketeers  and  western leftists and university charlatans selling the global warming scare, (blaming white man for its cause).  Billions of dollars  have been stolen from Uncle Sam from propagandists  relying on the ignorance  of the general population. ghr)

Study: No speed-up in global warming, Earth less sensitive to CO2

by Rick Moran  at American Thinker:

“Here is a setback for climate hysterics who say the Earth is warming catastrophically and drastic action is needed to save us.

A new study by the University of Alabama in Huntsville (UAH) shows that the planet is warming at a much slower rate than believed previously, and the atmosphere is less sensitive to rising levels of CO2 than predicted.

The exhaustive study indirectly confirms recent research that shows that a jump in the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere has had little effect on rising temperatures.  This contradicts climate models that predict that rising levels of CO2 lead directly to rising temps.

Anthony Watts:

Mathematically removing the natural but transient climatic effects of volcanoes and El Niño/La Niña Pacific Ocean warming and cooling events leaves an underlying climate trend, all or some part of which might be attributed to human causes – including enhanced greenhouse forcing caused by rising levels of CO2 and other manmade greenhouse gases in the atmosphere.

At present, however, there is no accepted tool or technique for confidently estimating how much of the warming in the past 38+ years might be due to natural causes.

The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change – the U.N. agency tasked with studying global warming – believes that 50% of warming is due to human industrial activity.  While some scientists claim there is an observable difference between naturally occurring CO2 and that generated by burning fossil fuels, those methods are in dispute, which makes any statement regarding how much of the rise in temps is due to humans unreliable.

The UAH paper destroys the models that predict rising temps that correlate with rising CO2 levels:

For the purposes of this research, we assumed the climate was stable during that time, that the natural climate trend would have been zero,” Christy said. “If the natural trend was zero, then the climate models say the atmosphere is more than twice as sensitive to CO2 as the data might suggest.

Of course, if the natural trend was greater than zero – if the natural climate was warming even a little bit – then the models have the atmospheric sensitivity to CO2 even further out of whack than that.

This has always been the skeptics’ chief complaint about using predictive climate and atmospheric models to develop public policy: the models’ gross inaccuracies.  How can a responsible government develop policies to address a problem that no one knows the extent of – or if it really exists?

Reliance by scientists on ground-based temperature data has always been questioned by skeptics.  This study shows why:

Other researchers have tried to calculate the climate’s sensitivity using temperature data collected at the Earth’s surface. But that data lacks complete global coverage, especially over the oceans. Changes in the character of the land surface near thermometers (such as paving and urban growth) and changes in the thermometer instruments over time also add uncertainty to the data.

“Additionally, surface temperatures used for tracking climate change use the average of daily maximum and minimum temperatures,” said McNider, a distinguished professor emeritus at UAH. “Those minimum nighttime temperatures reflect only the temperature of a shallow layer of air near the surface and not temperatures in the deep layer of the atmosphere.”

Not only are the conclusions being drawn by global warming hysterics wrong, but their methodology leaves a lot to be desired.  It should be no surprise, then, that if you put bad science in, bad science will come out.

If climate change were an ordinary field of science to study, this paper would be major news.  But the issue of global warming is so wrapped up in politics and business that any objective look at the claims made by other scientists is either dismissed out of hand or buried…”



Will the Era of Obama and Hillary Corruption Truly Come to an END?


I wrote the following article here March 15, 2010, seven and a half years ago, a year into   the ERA OF OBAMA AND HILLARY CORRUPTION when white became  black, bad replaced  good, thieving and lying became  rich, and our America was suddenly made  evil, using the Democrat Party, the nation’s press and news centers, but most of all, our schools, as their nuclear weapons to create their Oceania of “1984”.

They preached feminism, black racism, leftism  as their weapons in the nation’s schools and universities to stir up their  hate of  a God-fearing  free and open American society where women can  be female, and men can be male and Truth be sought, protected  and practiced again  in a free society where Donald J. Trump can be President.   Was “1984” coming to our American shores?

Please read the following article of years ago,  “CIVILIZATIONS ARE NOT MURDERED.  THEY COMMIT SUICIDE!”

“One of the best ways to measure a culture in decline is to examine its contemporary art.   How do society’s “expressionists” express.  Where along the continuum from the sewer and  vile to the rich and uplifting do “artists” make their observations, imprints and money?   What and who are valued?

Painting, music, lyrics, scripts, scenery, sculpture, day to day language, whatever the people see, interpret, value, and purchase.   What is considered civil?  Inspiring?  Thoughtful?

Art is simply a reflection of what is learned from the schooling of ones young.  What is valued is what will be taught and expected to be valued in the future.   Who does the teaching?

I believe  America’s  “being”  is in decline…..collapse…..is in free fall…..and one often wonders if  the slide is beyond repair…..Who is doing the teaching?

Those who have studied the history of civilizations know the absolute truth  of Arnold Toynbee’s  “Great civilizations are not murdered.  They commit suicide”

Civilization’s  illnesses,  including those with symptoms of suicide, can best be exposed on the couch of its art.   How is the cultural soul expressed in sound, sight and mind?

Is America wavering  on the ledge of hope, or is it falling into  the stench of the pit of rot?   The battle is between traditional values of decency,  justice, and personal responsibility and those devoted to a New Order, in  general, and the collective, the Marxist Democrats led by Barack Obama.

Mr. Obama has in no way caused the rot and consequent stench.  He is its student and he fosters what he has learned.  He and his Marxist friends in their Ivory Towers from whence he came,  and their Leftwing assaults on  JudeoChristian teachings, supported by the amorality driving Big Business all overwhelming  modern life.  They evolved from people doing “good works” as much as the vile.

Judge for yourselves, citizens of America.  Stop by your museums and galleries.  Open your magazines, review the pictures and writings;  go to the theaters both cinema and stage.  What is valued in the cultural expression?   Where and what are the billboards of its soul?   Why?

How does the art identify good of the culture from the bad?  Or doesn’t it bother?  Should it bother?   Who is honored?  Who is honorable?  What is honor?   What is taught?

Whom do the society’s judges  find guilty?   Why?  What do the teachers teach which might determine guilt?  What stories do they tell in the classroom, on television, in the movie houses and in the newspapers?  What is valued?

Are honesty, integrity,  personal responsibility, search for truth,  and concern for ones fellow man constantly integrated into the being of the culture?

Or is the high of  culture free at last, excited and mesmerized  by the drives  of the groin for pleasure and profit, politics and religion?

You answer!  What do we teach our children?   How are our children formed by what they see, and hear, and by whom they are taught to see and hear….Who and what lead them into the better life?

What is the better life?

Who teaches the young…..the STATE or the CITIZEN FAMILY?