Warmists: 'We can't win the game, so let's change the rules'

james-delingpoleBy James Delingpole

Willis Eschenbach’s recent guest post at Watts Up With That? on the current state of ‘Climate science’ should be made compulsory reading in every classroom, every university science department, every eco-charity, every environmental NGO and in every branch of government. They won’t like it up ‘em, that’s for sure.

What Eschenbach says is so pure and simple and obvious you’d need to be as dumb as Chris Huhne not to get it:

The theory linking man-made CO2 with dangerous global warming is dead. It has been falsified. It has run smack bang into a “null hypothesis.” It has met its Waterloo. It has bought the farm. It has gone for a Burton. It has cashed in its chips, fallen off its perch, gone south, gone west, shuffled off this mortal coil, run down the curtain and joined the Choir Invisible.  Man-made Global Warming has ceased to exist.

Eschenbach wrote his post in response to a bizarre speech prepared by Dr Kevin Trenberth of the National Center for Atmospheric Research (NCAR), which he intended to deliver to the American Meteorological Society. Trenberth is the arch-warmist perhaps best known for writing the Climategate email which went:

The fact is that we can’t account for the lack of warming at the moment and it is a travesty that we can’t.

When Trenberth’s speech was pre-published on the internet it caused something of a stir, both for the way large chunks of it had been taken almost verbatim from another scientist and for its use six times of the word “denier”. (Thanks to some kindly advice proferred by Steve McIntyre, Trenberth has now significantly altered his speech. “Deniers” has been altered to “sceptics.” Probably quite sensibly since many in the AMS, being meteorologists rather than “climate scientists” tend very much to fall into the sceptic camp).

What Eschenbach focuses on, though, is Trenberth’s absurd demand that the “null hypothesis” on AGW theory be reversed. That is, instead of having to prove AGW exists, what people should now be required to prove that it doesn’t exist. (!)

Read the rest at the London Telegraph.

141 Responses to Warmists: 'We can't win the game, so let's change the rules'

  1. paul wenum January 19, 2011 at 3:46 am #

    A simple question. Why aren’t items such as this published in the “normal” media? I believe we all know the answer. Who pays to advertise “go green” which brings money to the bottom line?? Could it be companies with vested interests? GE?, GORE, et al? Oh, pray tell, not them?

  2. Rob N. Hood January 19, 2011 at 3:07 pm #

    Want some cheese with that whine?

    The continued dismantling of what made America great, for regular Americans, was the only reason Obama was selected by the oligarchs to be president. A Black Democrat? Who better after eight years of fascist rule to trick the American people into complacency?

    Like Bubba came in after 12 years of Reagan/Bush secret wars and Treasury looting (remember the $89 billion dollar S&L bailout the first Bush left us with?), refused to investigate the blatant wrongdoings of those two Republican criminal administrations and then proceeded to enact NAFTA, WTO, an extension of crimes the death penalty applies to at the federal level, erosion of Fourth Amendment rights, and, while he was at it, the destruction of welfare in preparation for the dismantling of bankruptcy protections for the middle class, and, finally, the Great GOP Grand Prize- the evisceration of Social Security. Yep, Libertarians everywhere should be rejoicing, not whining. Maybe the whiny wheels get the grease…and the oil they so love?

    • Jerk A. Knot February 1, 2011 at 3:30 pm #

      Good god is there a conspiracy you don’t subscribe to….. Libertarians are to stoned to rejoice.

      • Rob N. Hood February 3, 2011 at 8:06 am #

        WTF? “Libertarians are too stoned?” And what I describe above isn’t conspiracy theory it’s fact. You should really try and get those two things straight before you post something that makes you appear naive and/or foolish.

  3. NEIL F. AGWD/BSD January 19, 2011 at 11:03 pm #

    Mark this as a “you should have asked me I would have told you”

    “A Saskatchewan farm couple whose land lies over the world’s largest carbon capture and storage project says greenhouse gases seeping from the soil are killing animals and sending groundwater foaming to the surface like shaken soda pop.”

  4. paul wenum January 20, 2011 at 3:42 am #

    Love it Neil. Good job!

  5. Rob N. Hood January 20, 2011 at 7:46 am #

    Good ol’ mother nature fighting back? Who knows…? 2012 is just around the corner anyway. Another ominous “sign” is the creation of the 13th Zodiac sign. Shiver me timbers! Maybe Obama really is the anti-christ.

    The US has a fairly extreme right wing party whose goals are to tilt the interclass terms of trade in favour of the plutocrats regardless of harm this does to the remaining 99% of nominal US citizens and residents. This party is called the Democratic Party. There is also the Republican Party, an insane right wing party, which favors plutocratic interests even more than do the Democrats, if that is possible, and in addition panders to racists and to the religious bigots of the Christian Taliban (those who oppose abortion but support the death penalty).

    We do need some saving… and I don’t mean the bank.

    • Jerk A. Knot January 20, 2011 at 3:00 pm #


      Don’t lick the back of the smiley face sticker…. It causes delusional thinking… Your posts are so off the chart that no one will take them serious…..

      Great posts they highlight how the mindless never challenge what they are told…. How much work did it take to find the facts… 15 min? Keep the facts flowing…. Some people on here just want to spew misinformation to mislead the Argument.

      • NEIL F. AGWD/BSD January 20, 2011 at 9:29 pm #


    • NEIL F. AGWD/BSD January 21, 2011 at 9:24 pm #

      So let me get this straight. The Democrat party is a fairly extreme right wing party? But the Republican party is the insane right wing party? Huh? That makes no sense at all. It is completely irrational and makes me wonder if you are not psychologically challenged, or pharmacologically influanced.

      • Hal Groar January 23, 2011 at 7:38 pm #

        Neil, where does the Tea Party fall in this little scale? The “To the right of the insane yet farther right then the right winger or preposterously right wing”? Right?

        • NEIL F. AGWD/BSD January 25, 2011 at 2:24 pm #

          Wrong! The Tea Party is right wing fanaticism at ludicrous speed!!!!! It moves farther right every moment!!!!!

          • Hal Groar January 25, 2011 at 8:45 pm #

            So it is farther right then when you wrote that. Wow! Count me in!

  6. Rob N. Hood January 20, 2011 at 3:29 pm #

    Dang now someone tells me. I’ve been licking the front sides all this time…

    If your comment wasn’t so sad it would be funny. The fact that people who are allegedly otherwise capable of discerning reality well enough to function independently and then react that way to what is more or less the truth about our poiltical system never ceases to amaze me. Granted not all people follow politics, world history, or their own history for that matter, it still amazes me that what is in fact staring us all in the face evryday is so difficult to comprehend.

    And BTW, could you give me some credit for challenging what I’m told on this site? Do you then admit at least that I am not mindless? Seems logical.

    • Jerk A. Knot January 21, 2011 at 5:11 pm #

      No credit at all. Because you just post what you are told to post. When you challenge us we respond with facts. You as you always do respond with some post that is not related from an ultra left wing blog….. I have pointed this out time after time. Logical….. no just robotic. Mindless.

    • NEIL F. AGWD/BSD January 27, 2011 at 12:40 pm #

      Rob you do not challenge what you read here, you do your best to contradict, discredit, and ridicule it. The only thing I’ll give you credit for is tenacity.

  7. Rob N. Hood January 21, 2011 at 9:06 am #

    Grover Norquist spilled the beans years ago about the elites’ plan for America. Make its government small enough to drown in a bath tub. You Extreme Rightys conintue realize your wet dreams. And everyone else with a brain and a heart only realize horror and sadness.

    Policy makers are working behind the scenes to come up with a way to let states declare bankruptcy and get out from under crushing debts, including the pensions they have promised to retired public workers.

    Unlike cities, the states are barred from seeking protection in federal bankruptcy court. Any effort to change that status would have to clear high constitutional hurdles because the states are considered sovereign.

    But proponents say some states are so burdened that the only feasible way out may be bankruptcy, giving Illinois, for example, the opportunity to do what General Motors did with the federal government’s aid.

    Beyond their short-term budget gaps, some states have deep structural problems, like insolvent pension funds, that are diverting money from essential public services like education and health care. (hurt the people now so you can hurt them more later).

    Some members of Congress fear that it is just a matter of time before a state seeks a bailout, say bankruptcy lawyers who have been consulted by Congressional aides.

    Related content Texas lawmakers faced with $15 billion shortfall
    Brown seeks 5-year extension of California taxes
    Illinois is broke, and can’t pay its bills
    Surge in bankruptcies shows signs of slowing

    ..Bankruptcy could permit a state to alter its contractual promises to retirees, which are often protected by state constitutions, and it could provide an alternative to a no-strings bailout.

    Along with retirees, however, investors in a state’s bonds could suffer, possibly ending up at the back of the line as unsecured creditors.

  8. Jerk A. Knot January 21, 2011 at 5:14 pm #

    Rob….. just more drivel….. and it also points out how correct the above article is….. when the left is losing the argument then they change the argument.

  9. paul wenum January 22, 2011 at 1:15 am #

    Rob has read and has adopted a few of Saul Alinsky’s rules. Rule #5. “Ridicule is man’s most potent weapon.” Rule #13. “Pick a target, freeze it, personalize it, and polarize it.” Review all previous posts. Sound familiar?

  10. NEIL F. AGWD/BSD January 22, 2011 at 9:49 pm #

    Leave Rob alone! He’s only trying to inform us on how stupid and ignorant we are. I’m mean come on people we have to acknowledge his superiority in intelect, philosophy, and poiltical ideology. And we have to admit our own iferiority, uselesness, bigotry, selfishness, anger, violence, and hatred. He’s trying to help us!!!! For crying out loud!!!!……… Wait, sorry…… reverse that.

  11. NEIL F. AGWD/BSD January 22, 2011 at 10:50 pm #

    Here’s a good one

    “If weather were just entertainment this would not matter but their refusal to accept their total failure forces up energy and food prices through low carbon cult measures and holds back real science which directly prevents governments and authorities from applying useful forecasts which can reduce suffering and save lives. People have died on UK and Europe’s roads through lack of winter salting due to Met Office failed warmist winter forecasts and Australian floods are worse because the Govt cut dam projects under Green ‘expect droughts’ advice – http://climaterealists.com/7038 . The Global warming cult ideology is reducing living standards and causing needless suffering and death, and must be stopped.””

  12. Rob N. Hood January 23, 2011 at 9:01 am #

    Paul seems to know more about Alinsky than anyone around here. If I am “using” his tactics occasionally it is only inadvertantly. But these things can be effective, and it isn’t only a left wing thing. Many tactics to persuade and confuse and control have come from the Right. We all know this, but Paul is fixated on the one Left winger who wrote it all out in the open for all to see, right or left, eh Paul? Paul himself uses his tactics quite frequently.

    And what I posted above is not drivel, unfortunately. You can see it in the news if you pay attention.

    • Hal Groar January 23, 2011 at 9:56 am #

      So now Paul is in charge of the news?! Congrats Paul! You are now a member of the elite media! Since you have been hoisted to this respected position by our reality challenged fellow poster Rob, could you do us and the world a favor and report the truth once in a while on various media outlets considered main stream? Maybe explain how the hockey stick is a farce and how the last decade was actually cooler. I would love to see JUST ONCE the actual percentage of man’s influence on the atmosphere reported. (Last I heard it was 0.025%) Paul feel free to correct me on that figure if I am wrong. Also Paul, could you drop a line to Megan Kelly for me….nah…that doesn’t belong here…Thanks Paul for listening and good luck with saving the newspaper.

      • Rob N. Hood January 23, 2011 at 1:02 pm #

        Umm… what I meant is what I posted ABOVE of Paul’s little play at projection, is not drivel and that it is in the news. Either you misunderstood that or you just wanted to post drivel yourself. I also didn’t reference newspapers although they do qualify for what is still a news source. Do I believe the MSM? No, of course not- probably only 5% of the time. Is there actual truth here and there in it? Of course. You have to use intelligence, logic and reasoning to be able to sift out the chaff to glean anything worthy out of the MSM. Hal/Paul- The financial problems with the States and the Fed Govt. are well known, is it not? Or is that a hoax too? Please answer Hal or Paul, but only if you dare to add anything meaningful to this dialogue.

        • Jerk A. Knot January 23, 2011 at 3:17 pm #

          Rob…. everything you say is illogical drivel. in the last couple of posts you said that what you have said is in the news. But then the MSM is not reliable. But newspapers are a news source…. Drivel… all we need is a picture with the drool rolling down your lip… Are you for real?

  13. paul wenum January 24, 2011 at 12:39 am #

    Rob, Truth hurts once in awhile. I have an extremely high pain tolerance for people attempt to pull me in to a discussion and then ridicule me. Must be the Scot in me. Other’s may not. You should apply for Keith Overbites position at msnbc? Keith would be proud. You post just like he used to speak.

  14. Rob N. Hood January 24, 2011 at 9:46 am #

    Wow. Your inability to discuss anything with anyone who is not (R)abid is becoming quite pronounced. Jerk- what is it about the english language you don’t understand? I was very clear about my opinion of the MSM, including that there is some real news in it from time to time. And Paul, you become more whiny by the day. Is the bright sun of Hawaii getting to you, my poor fellow? Or just working too hard in paradise?? It actually is difficult for me to see you people as real, but I do.

    It’s simple mathematics: Bring down the “coastal elite” and the single 40-something Ohio salesman might actually matter. And if they’re not brought down, at the very least bad right-wing policies make happy coastal elites’ lives a little less perfect, a little less enviable–at least they’re suffering from indigestion and palpitations over the possibility that insane right-wing policies could ruin them at any time. And in a world of so little possibility and so much petty malice, that’s better than nothing.

    This is why all the talk about “personal interests” is a sham, a delusion that the Left needs to get over. Spite voters (R’s) don’t care solely about their own rational economic interests, nor are they bothered by how “the left talks as if they know what everyone’s best interests are,” an argument you often hear from the whiny right. What bothers the Spite-ists is that the Left really does know what’s in their interests. If you’re miserable, you don’t want to be told what’s best for you by someone who’s correct–it’s sort of like being occupied by a foreign army with good intentions. You’d rather muck things up on your own, something you’re quite good at, and bring others down with you–than live with the shame of having been helped by someone more decent and talented than you.

    Spite voting is mostly a white male phenomenon, which is why a majority of white males vote Republican. It comes from a toxic mix of thwarted expectations, cowardice, shame, and a particular strain of anomie that seems unique to the white American male experience.

    • Jerk A. Knot January 24, 2011 at 12:24 pm #


      More class warfare drivel…. Take down the “coastal elite”. Really? Are you now the champion for the sales man that lives in fly over country? I really don’t think so. What ever you do to Take down the “coastal elite” will hurt the center. The problem is that the most of people with the “R” behind there name understand that. The tax that is put on the richest people in the country to bring them down also acts as a bar to impede the independent rancher, salesman, ____________ (fill in the blank) from advancing into that Tax Bracket. I mean seriously Rob. If you make under $150K a year and can keep $0.70 on every dollar you make why would you want to make over $150 and only get to keep $0.55 on every dollar. Think of it this way also Rob. I start a company and my company pays taxes, licenses, and fees to every level of government to just start it. then pays taxes on every dollar made. Then I pay myself a salary to feed my family. I pay taxes on that Dollar again. then when I spend it I pay taxes again!!!! By the time I pay all the taxes on every dollar I have to earn more than $4 to buy a $2 Energy Drink it to fuel me to get out there and work for it.

      Your drivel about “the best interest” is BS. It is the fundamental difference between the left and the right. People are hungry so the left want to give theme fish to eat. The right wants to teach them to fish. The differences are that the plan the left has keeps the people dependant on the suppliers of the fish. The plan of the right allows the people to be self dependant. Oh I can hear you now. What about the people that are not able to fish. There is no plan that can survive the what if’s. We have a heart on the right and we will help the truly needy as we always have. oh I know you will pop o me on that. Just look at the results of numerous surveys and you will see that “righties” give more to charities than “lefties” do.

      All an all Rob I will say thank you for giving me a way to release my stress. This has been very therapeutic and my wife says she can actually notice the difference in me.

  15. Rob N. Hood January 24, 2011 at 3:27 pm #

    Your superficial analyses and inability to comprehend the irony and POV of the above is kind of funny. It’s the Right that wants to take down the coastal elite… ie. the Latte drinkers, the hollywood elite, the birkenstock wearing academia, in other words the Liberals… ummm see? I know, however, that this new knowledge of the above won’t/wouldn’t change your response, which says more about you than me. I am seeking an answer to my questions about the Right and why they vote the way they do. If you’re rich (arbitrary number above 200K is what think of as rich) I totally understand why you’d vote Republican. This is very common knowledge and openly admitted, except in your circles apparently. And yes (in a very weary tone) there are rich Liberal (ala the “coastal elite”) but those folks are the exception to the rule. Besides, if you were to really objectively observe those who are obscenely rich AND powerful they tend to be Right wing. The fact that you drag out the old talking point about the Right giving away more to charity was pretty much shredded by yours truly rather easily and convincingly (at least to those who aren’t as set in their ways as some) again says more about you than me.

    And I’m glad you are not beating your wife any more (humor). Birds of a feather flock together. I for one admit that I could not marry a Righty. Opposites attract but for the long haul it seems to me that two people probably need to be fairly similar in their political beliefs to be happily married. Of course those who ignore politics (which I cannot understand, except that it is an very frustrating and ugly thing to behold-politics I mean) or those who can’t care less about it (again, I cannot comprehend that attitude) also can marry and hopefully live happily in their blissful ignorance. Sometimes I envy them though.

    • Jerk A. Knot January 24, 2011 at 10:39 pm #

      I find no humor in your statement about me beating my wife…. You are way out of line…. I really don’t think you would have the courage to even whisper that to my face. You are a brave man hiding behind a fake name. Why would you even think that that is even remotely funny. Another example of how out of touch you are…. You preach civility and criticize people for not being civil then you insult me by cracking jokes about “beating my WIFE”…… Sick.

      Obscenely rich = Right Wing……. Have you ever heard of George Soros…. the Hinze’s…. the Kennedy’s…… Oh forget it…. [comment edited]

      • Rob N. Hood January 27, 2011 at 8:29 am #

        Why do you bother which such slieght of hand? Besides I never said there aren’t any wealthy “Liberals” or Dems. Quite the contrary. What I do say is this: (now pay attention this time). Most of the ultra wealthy, the elite that have the most power and control over our institutions are Right-wing. And other than the very few communist countries left- the sqame holds true around the world. Simple logical observation and unbiased reasoning will allow you to see the reality of that statement. Apparently you Rightys all believe in some kind of 50’s commie plot, meaning that it is the ultra wealthy Left who hold most of this power and control. Not so. One quick example of this is the media and who owns it. Rightys all.

  16. Rob N. Hood January 24, 2011 at 3:37 pm #

    BTW- you folks never relieve my stress- you unfortunately add to it. I must enjoy wallowing in it though, eh? I have a new friend who is apparently just as curious about “why people like me vote the way I do” in other words she is very conservative. I also get the feeling she wants to “save me” from it and the error of my ways. I don’t get mad at her but it does get annoying, so I know how you feel. But I don’t usually tell you Rightys that you are wrong or that you need to become just like me. I think you feel that, and maybe correctly so, but my posts are mostly just info, and POV (point of view) and opinion. I do that to get your responses and opinion and God-forbid an actual dialogue or spirited debate. However, it usually degenerates. I take some of the blame for that but not for the majority of it. You guys have not stepped up, except for Jerk sometimes. So for that Jerk I commend you. Now about your web name…

    • Jerk A. Knot January 24, 2011 at 10:47 pm #

      My web name is simple….. It goes back to my days in the military…. to quickly correct someone from making future mistakes we Jerk a Knot in their A$$. It is not a very polite thing but it works when you are training someone when there mistakes will result in the death of someone. Or as you will twist it…. It won’t cause enoulgh death of the enemy. You have accused me of being violent…. I have been in extreamy violent situations. situations where it boiled down to Kill him or die. I am still standing. He is not.

      • Dan McGrath January 25, 2011 at 10:19 am #

        I thought the expression was “jerk a knot in your tail” – makes more sense, anyhow.

        • Jerk A. Knot January 25, 2011 at 11:17 am #

          Agreed, But in the military is more colorful in the way we speak.

          • NEIL F. AGWD/BSD January 26, 2011 at 7:13 am #

            That’s ate up

  17. NEIL F. AGWD/BSD January 24, 2011 at 6:30 pm #


  18. Rob N. Hood January 25, 2011 at 7:38 am #

    Jerking a knot in someone’s a** doesn’t make sense to me. Must be a military secret. [edited]

    • Jerk A. Knot January 25, 2011 at 10:03 am #


      Another example of how [deleted] you are… Simple facts in front of you and you can not get it right. Neil’s post was made before mine. Look at the time hacks…..

      BTW you still owe me an apology for your rude remark. I forgive you with out the apology but just maybe you can man up for once and be sincere.

      Please remember one very important thing. If it was not for me and my Brothers and Sisters in Arms you would just be a troll waiting in bread lines waiting for the Government to feed you.

      You can call it Killing, murder, anger, violence or what ever you want. It will never be “a thing of the past” as so many aloof would suppose it to be. There are 2 ways to get some one to do what you want. You can reason with them or you can force them. To reason with someone there is a meeting of the minds that is often coupled with a cost vs. value decision. In the continuum of force there is physical and legal force. Legal force must be backed up with ability to enforce the law with physical force. These two continuums can be mixed as well to achieve desired results. So to ignore force is to ensure that those who are only interested in their own good will prevail. examples of these kinds of people are Gengus Kahn, Alexander the Great, Chairman Mao, Hitler, Sadam, Castro, Napoleon, and the list goes on and on. I was once told by a great man who worked for the Royal Family of Saudi. That the Rule of Law was only as strong as the Army that enforces it. BTW he is dead because he was too “western” in his thinking. They tried to persuade him to change his mind and when that did not work the tried to force him to. De did not and ended up dead. Did he win…. only the future will tell.

      • Rob N. Hood January 26, 2011 at 8:31 am #

        tsk tsk tsk- are we defensive? You are simply another deluded self-aggrandized brainwashed warrior. Please explain my rude remark to you. All I see above is me commending you. Weird that… Now in this post I believe I have been rude. But truthful, of course. And I also don’t get your need to insult me due to the timing of posts, especially when I don’t see what it is you are referring to. BTW I was actually being rude to Neil, and the best part was unfortunately edited out.

        Oh I see it now… The wife thing. It’s an old joke Jerk, for crying out loud. Even Paul or Neil have used it here against me. Your quick anger and use of veiled threats says a lot about you. It’s not a flattering picture.

        • Jerk A. Knot January 27, 2011 at 10:13 am #

          I am sorry thy used the “old Joke” against you. They were wron in doing so. I do not see any humor in it and believe it is inapproprate. Please retract it. I have never struck a woman much less m Wife. You may see humor in such a barbaric action I do not. If you do see humor in it I worryfor tha safety of your wife and kids simply because abuse is accecptable in your eyes. I have not used any threats against you I have simply drawn the line in the sand of what is accecpitable. Calling me an abusive husband is not. I am also pointing out that you would not have the courage to speak to me in that mannor if you were standing in front of me. I am calling you out for what you are. An intelectual and moral coward. That will probably get editeted but I am ok with that.

          Of course you will stay the same old tired retoric spewing left wing cook you always are. It is funny how you never attack what I say …. you just dismiss me as a defensive arogant right winger… your tactic is .. if you cant defeat the facts then attack the person….

          So Rob. Would you meet me for a beer so we could have a face to face conversation. Heck I might even give you an $80K job if you bring your resume.

          • NEIL F. AGWD/BSD January 27, 2011 at 7:32 pm #

            I’d like a $80K job!!!! As long as it does not involve cleaning toilets, I’m your man.

        • NEIL F. AGWD/BSD January 27, 2011 at 7:28 pm #

          What?!?!?! I’ve never said anything of the sort. And I would not. Don’t go saying that Iv’e said something I never said so you can slip out from under something that you said that was deploreable.

          • Rob N. Hood February 9, 2011 at 11:11 am #

            Paul said it then… but it doesn’t matter- it’s more than a joke, and I didn’t take it literally of course. I can’t believe I have to explain something like this to you people. It comes from a lawyer tactic, used to incriminate someone by innuendo, sort of. It is such an old tactic, and one that of course isn’t tolerated in modern court rooms, that it is now used as a joke to make a point. In this context then, the only context available, you have taken it entirely out of context, and based upon your quick temper have turned it into something WAY out of proportion. This whole exercise says a lot about you people. Your first, and seeminly ONLY, reaction to something you don’t understand is to 1. take offense. 2. threaten retaliation. 3. refuse to attempt any understanding of the meaning and/or context of said piece.

            Go ahead and take offense… but please, wait until after you fully understand what it is you are being offended by. That only seems natural to me, but apparenltly unnatural to you. Mores the pity.

  19. paul wenum January 25, 2011 at 11:07 pm #

    Rob, you are correct. I know Alinsky tactics extremely well. Always know your adversary and their intent. That said, I do not agree at all with his tactics.

    • Jerk A. Knot January 27, 2011 at 10:26 am #

      Brovo Paul.

      If you know the enemy and know yourself, you need not fear the result of a hundred battles. If you know yourself but not the enemy, for every victory gained you will also suffer a defeat. If you know neither the enemy nor yourself, you will succumb in every battle.
      – Sun Tzu

      • NEIL F. AGWD/BSD January 27, 2011 at 7:35 pm #

        What if your enemy knows you, and himself as well? Would that be a stalemate? Just sayin’;-]

        • Jerk A. Knot January 28, 2011 at 5:44 pm #

          That is good use of logic. But it does not rule out the truth that knowing your enemy is essential. Without knowing the it is certain defeat.

          • NEIL F. AGWD/BSD January 29, 2011 at 6:56 am #

            I’m sure that is mostly true. I think that two opposing commanders can be equally aware of each, and the other. But I think there are many other factors that can affect the outcome such as the morale of the troops, supply logistics, the ability to adapt and overcome, and things like sheer luck. For example look at the Normandy invasion. Most of the American airborne troops never made it to their drop zones, and were scattered all over hell and gone, in one great big cluster fu**. But instead of floundering, they were able to adapt to it, stitching together with men from different units they were able to achieve most of their objectives while confusing the hell out of the German forces.
            I’m not knocking Sun Tzu, mind you, I’m just saying that knowing your enemy and knowing yourself does not gaurantee that you will be victorious. And if two opposing commanders know each, and the other equally well, the victor will be the one that is luckier than the other.

  20. NEIL F. AGWD/BSD January 26, 2011 at 5:49 am #

    “In its latest outburst it said that it was pointless to expect any action from “corporate shills like Barak Obama” and said that Greens should be looking towards an armed insurrection on the lines of the Cuban Marxist revolution:”

  21. Rob N. Hood January 26, 2011 at 8:45 am #

    So just another thing the Libertarians (Tea Party) and the Leftys on the Left (Green) have in common. We are all getting fed up with the trashing of America and its middle class. Correct me if I’m wrong but it’s the extreme right who have been the first to actually start carrying around weapons. If things continue to go bad for the middle class there will be some kind of uprisings on both ends of the political spectrum. Your attempt to paint only the Left as the potentially violent ones is extremely silly, not to mention currently inaccurate.

    Thanks Paul for your rare words of conciliation (if that’s what it is). It’s funny that you say you don’t agree with all of Alinsky’s tactics, which then implies that you agree with some or most…? And so all of your accusations against me using his tactics appears confusing to me.

    • Jerk A. Knot January 27, 2011 at 10:37 am #

      Rob You never cease to suprise me… This time you are correct. It was the Right that first started carring arms around way back in 1775.

      • Rob N. Hood January 27, 2011 at 4:38 pm #

        arh, arh, arh…. sooooo clever….not.

        • Jerk A. Knot January 28, 2011 at 5:45 pm #

          It may not be clever but it is true.

          • Rob N. Hood February 9, 2011 at 11:19 am #

            Not true- a false comparison. But I know you Rightys like to aggrandize yourselves and your beliefs with patriotic valor and rightousness. The early Americans were simply home-grown terrorists from the British point of view, not unlike that of many peoples around the world doing this as we speak, or trying to. They were people fighting for freedom from Oligarchy, from Monarchy, from oppression. If anything that would make them Leftists. But hey- go ahead and fill your mind with delusion if it makes you feel good. But that’s what it is- delusion.

  22. Rob N. Hood January 26, 2011 at 12:30 pm #

    Another thing Paul. The DOW’s been up for quite a while and has cracked 12K. Remember when Obama was not even Prez a year and you blamed him for the implosion of 2008 (actually his predecessors fault)? Are you going to give Obama any credit for the rising DOW? Just wondering. You sure have been quiet about that.

    • Hal Groar January 27, 2011 at 10:29 pm #

      yeah…Barry is a friend to business…I think the implosion of 2008 was due to a Democratic congress, not GW. But of course Rob will think different. Put your spin on it Robbie!!

      • Rob N. Hood February 9, 2011 at 11:22 am #

        No spin needed Hal. Just harsh reality. Take the prejudicial blinders off, if you dare to. Can you? I wonder…

  23. paul wenum January 26, 2011 at 9:03 pm #

    By Obama relenting on certain subjects yet to be determined, the market has started to get back on course. That said, let’s hope it continues to go up. Your financial future depends upon it. At least all my neighbors retired depend on it going up instead of down. Too many houses up for sale or foreclosed upon in my area and it hasn’t changed. I’m still down 30% from three years ago. I will work until I’m 90 at the rate everything is going. Now, all in fixed income only. Learned my lesson. Oh well, it’s only my life savings as well as others. By the way, what about the dot.com crash under Clinton? I quess you were just a child? Sounds like it.

  24. Rob N. Hood January 27, 2011 at 4:36 pm #

    The dot.com crash? Purely a market bubble unrelated to what Clinton did or needed to deal with at that time. What a nonsensical comparison. As usual. It seems to me however that the market, other than fads, are what most Presidents care about, ie. the wealthy elite. Over the years it has come to my attention that when the Dow is up, ordinary people have it tough. Thank God the thieves and greed-heads don’t have their greasy hands on social security. THAT is what most older folks depend on, those average people, like me (some day). People like you Paul may have significant investments to worry your little head about, but most people Do Not. Still waiting to hear your praises of Obama- the Dow is about as high as it’s ever been. I predict another crash, followed by another and another. Why? The flaws have not been fixed. And if China calls in our debts, then we are done. Leave it to the greed-heads to sell us all out to the biggest communist country in the world. We’ve been had. The wealthy elite rig the game and leave us schmucks holding the bag. And the bag is full of IOU’s.

    • Jerk A. Knot January 28, 2011 at 5:51 pm #

      more class warfare. Dirvel Drivel Drivel!!!!!!!!

      As for China… How are they going to collect. They have no Navy and they surly won’t launch. Diplomatic and Economic power is nothing without the Military power to back it up. But you are absoutly Obama has fixed nothing at all. His resume is still as thin as it was in 2008.

      • Rob N. Hood January 29, 2011 at 3:55 pm #

        Only millions of soldiers. But it will be interesting to see what happens with our debt to them. Funny how you guys seem so worried about the commies most times, obsessed even, but when a Liberal makes a similar point you disagree 100%. Why is that? The economic power China currently weilds is huge, and they literally could take us down economically any time they want to. If that doesn’t give you pause for some concern, I think your thinker just ain’t workin’ quite right.

      • Rob N. Hood January 29, 2011 at 3:56 pm #

        And W’s resume was thick? Only his head was thick.

        • Jerk A. Knot January 31, 2011 at 10:11 pm #

          LOL you are funny….. How are they going to get the Million Soldiers here. You have no concept of real world power do you. Everything the Chinese has is focused on the defense of China. I would be worried if they had a land border with us yes. But they lack the ability to cross even a small expanse of water.

          • Rob N. Hood February 9, 2011 at 3:46 pm #

            Gee, Jerk, thank you so much for your amazing and grandiose views on what China can do/could do militarily. You and George Armstrong Custer would have seen eye to eye, that’s for sure.

  25. NEIL F. AGWD/BSD January 27, 2011 at 7:38 pm #

    This is funny because none of it changes the fact that AGW is a lie. Now the question I have is who here has an agenda that is advanced by that lie?

  26. paul wenum January 27, 2011 at 10:54 pm #

    I agree. AGW is a lie. Pure and simple. Just read couple days ago that climate change is effecting our airstreams coming from the north? Just golfed with as guy from Alasks last week asnd it was 65 degrees below zero! Our jet streams must be screwed up? I blame climate change for my dog peeing in the house! Can’t blame anything else.

    • NEIL F. AGWD/BSD January 28, 2011 at 6:57 am #

      My sister just sent me a picture of me from the mid 90’s. I was muscular, good looking, and had a full head of hair. Now I’m fat, balding, and not quite so good looking….. It must be the raveges of global warming….. yeah….. that’s it!!!!

  27. paul wenum January 28, 2011 at 9:14 pm #

    Neil, It has affected all of us. Damn that Global warming! You must look over your shoulder for the tsunami coming in Minnesota! You never know do ya?

  28. paul wenum January 29, 2011 at 1:12 am #

    Thank you “Sir Knot”, In my mindset failure is never an option and I know myself as well as my enemies and do not fear results of a battle well fought be it verbal or physical. If you saw my face with a nose broken 16 times as well as other body parts you would understand and I’m sure you do. Our enemies can also become friends if basic discourse is allowed. Have numerous enemies that are now dear friends of mine. Took awhile but, I believe in never saying “never, you always, you should have, you never change”, etc. etc,…… Enough pontificating by the “Ole Scot.”

    • NEIL F. AGWD/BSD January 29, 2011 at 7:01 am #

      Whit’s fur ye’ll no go by ye!

  29. Rob N. Hood January 29, 2011 at 3:59 pm #

    Oh poor old Paul. The only way your nose got broke that many times would be if you were a professional boxer. Is that what you’re now saying? You sure seem to be full of it Paul. I mean really. Give it a rest. Plus, those things you believe in not saying? You say them ALL the time.

  30. paul wenum January 30, 2011 at 12:56 am #

    My friend, you have led a sheltered life. Your mother pray for ya at night? Pray for ya.

  31. paul wenum January 30, 2011 at 1:16 am #


    Let’s tell Rob he’s “Yer bums’s oot the windoe, ” and “Yer Off yer heid.” He will understand. It’s late. Been working too long and needed a break. Take care.

  32. NEIL F. AGWD/BSD January 31, 2011 at 7:34 am #

    “Dr. Noor van Andel, former head of research at Akzo Nobel, has a new paper out showing the available data to date contradicts the notion of greenhouse gas induced global warming or ‘climate change.’ He notes that while there have been extensive efforts to ‘prove’ the ‘greenhouse’ warming theory by bringing computer models and observations into agreement, this has been done “strangely only by adjusting the measurements instead of adjusting the models,” in other words, via unscientific means. Dr. van Andel instead finds that ocean oscillations and the cosmic ray theory of Svensmark et al best explain climate changes.”

  33. Rob N. Hood January 31, 2011 at 8:15 am #

    Ayn Rand took government assistance while decrying others who did the same:

    An interview with Evva Pryror, a social worker and consultant to Miss Rand’s law firm of Ernst, Cane, Gitlin and Winick verified that on Miss Rand’s behalf she secured Rand’s Social Security and Medicare payments which Ayn received under the name of Ann O’Connor (husband Frank O’Connor).

    As Pryor said, “Doctors cost a lot more money than books earn and she could be totally wiped out” without the aid of these two government programs. Ayn took the bail out even though Ayn “despised government interference and felt that people should and could live independently… She didn’t feel that an individual should take help.”

    You guys talk about extreme Leftist anarchists a lot, like it’s an actual force to be reckoned with in this country…not. Libertarians are also anarchists. But they and the Tea Party, and the extreme Right do have some power (a lot actually and unfortunately). Anarchy is anarchy, no matter which side it comes from. And hypocrisy is hypocrisy.

    • NEIL F. AGWD/BSD January 31, 2011 at 7:28 pm #

      Ain’t she been dead for like thirty years? And so what? Did she not pay into social security? Or pay taxes? I’m not counting on social security to be around when I retire, but if it is, you can be sure that I’m not going to send the check back.
      What is this Rob? This is nothing. Nobody cares. This is an excuse for you to feign indignation. And it is a weak, thin one. You are really running on vapors, and scraping the bottom of the barrel. I have an idea Rob. Why don’t you post something relevent, and germain to the topic?

  34. paul wenum January 31, 2011 at 11:07 pm #

    By the way guys, global warming IS DEAD. Don’t you agree?

  35. Rob N. Hood February 1, 2011 at 8:04 am #

    Ayn Rand is one of if not the main deity of the extreme Right. Especially Libertarians which most of you are. Even Ron Paul named his kid after her, Rand Paul. It’s VERY relevant to show the weak, thin, vapors Libertarians run on. And extreme hypocrisy. If that ain’t Germain I don’t know what is… or how about this?:

    Republicans take issue with one particular phrase that Obama uttered many times in his State of the Union address: “Invest in America.” Republicans regard this as code language for higher taxes and more government spending. This feeling is deeply rooted. When the Obama administration rescued Chrysler in 2009, Republican leaders blasted the move, and said that Chrysler would fail anyway:

    SEN. JOHN MCCAIN (R-AZ): “We should have let them go into bankruptcy, emerge and become viable corporations again. The unions didn’t want to have their very generous contracts renegotiated, so we put $80 billion into both General Motors and Chrysler, and anybody believes that Chrysler is going to survive, I’d like to meet them.” [11/19/2009]

    SEN. JIM DEMINT (R-SC): “The government has forced taxpayers to buy these failing companies without any plausible plan for profitability.”[06/01/2009]

    REP. PAUL BROUN (R-GA): “This is an unprecedented takeover from the private sector by this administration…It is totally unconstitutional, it’s totally against freedom, it’s totally unprecedented, and it’s exactly the same thing that Hugo Chávez is doing down in Venezuela.”[06/09/2009]

    REP. TRENT FRANKS (R-AZ): When Washington gets involved in a company, “the disaster that follows is predictable.” [07/22/2009]
    REP. LAMAR SMITH (R-TX): The government-led bankruptcy reorganizations of the companies “have been the leading edge of the Obama administration’s war on capitalism.” [7/22/2009]

    REP. MICHELE BACHMANN (R-MN): “I’m very concerned again about these motor takeovers from the federal government… We have a gangster government when the federal government has set up a new cartel and private businesses now have to go begging with their hand out.”[06/09/2009]

    But yesterday, the DC journal “The Hill” reported the following:

    The smallest of the Big Three U.S. automakers appears poised for a comeback less than two years after the government saved it from extinction. Chrysler made a $569 million net profit last year and has $10 billion in hand. It is adding jobs in the U.S. and slowly countering impressions in Washington and elsewhere that it can’t survive. “Over the course of the last 12 months, we’ve raised our outlook significantly,” said George Magliano, senior auto analyst for IHS Global Insight. “Their whole tone has changed over the last six to eight months.”

    Of course, Republicans made similar claims about the rescue of GM, saying that it was the “road to socialism.” According to the Center for Automotive Research, “if the government had not invested in the automotive industry, up to 80,000 automotive jobs would have been lost…Once Chrysler and GM emerged from their ‘orderly’ bankruptcies, the growth of automotive sector employment has been strong, with 52,900 workers added since July 2009. Had GM and Chrysler not successfully emerged, those jobs would have been permanently lost.”

    GM went pubic recently and very successfully, allowing the US Govt. to reduce it’s share to around 30% or so. It will continue to shed shares over-time to nothing, as was planned.

    We can expect Republican leaders to continually badmouth anything that the government might do to create jobs. It’s just part of their theology.

    • Jerk A. Knot February 1, 2011 at 4:02 pm #


      Crysler is not even one of the Big 3 any more. Dimaler bought them out then 5 years latter payed Seamans to take them off there hands. They are flush with Cash because Fiat bought them off the Bankruptsey because the Feds threw in 80 Billion. they have not paid one red cent back and if they fold Fiat will walk with the $$$. They are telling everyone that they are going to pay 2.7 Billion back some time this year….but….. that date keeps on changing.


      All of theoes guys are correct. You just don’t see it because you are so bitter because your life sucks. Dude stop crying and get off your rear end. Don’t tell me how hard you work delivering pizza and papers or what ever crappy job you do. Get out there and start earning a pay chek that pays more than 3 figures a week. If there arn’t any in MN load up the family and move to where the Jobs are. Just stop blaming everyone else like this mythical “Costal elete.” Oh I know there is a small class of them that push laws ect… but Believe me I had $1000 in savings when I bought in with a frind to open our Co. We are making it and there is nobody trying to take wht we are making except for a bunc of cry babies like you that are too lazy to get off the sofa and bust there hump. But they don’t mind griping about how bad they have it.

      Just stop your never ending woe is me BS.

      • Jerk A. Knot February 1, 2011 at 4:06 pm #

        Man I am sorry. I got spun up and did not even spell check it. I did not mean to come down on you Rob. I am sure you work Hard to provide for your family. I wish you all the luck because with the way you spew the BS you are going to find it hard to hold a “great” job or run one either.

        I am sorry dude. I am just feeling that you need truth not grace today.

    • NEIL F. AGWD/BSD February 1, 2011 at 6:14 pm #

      I don’t see how any of this has anything to do with global warming. This is not germain to the topic it is a distraction from the topic. You are presenting this as though it is some kind of smoking gun, but it’s a water pistol with no water in it.

      • Jerk A. Knot February 1, 2011 at 8:05 pm #

        Global warming is a natural event. The global warming hoax is an attempt to use the fear caused by a bunch of chicken Little scientists and politicians to legitimize there attempts to neuter the USA.

        • NEIL F. AGWD/BSD February 1, 2011 at 9:45 pm #

          Yes I know that. I usually do include “anthropogenic” when I say global warming. But thank you for getting back to the issue, indeed the focus, of this forum. Rob seems to think it is a vehicle for him to get his point of view out about the issues that he cares about. I wonder if he visits forums like for cat lovers or somthing, to voice his strong feelings about the coastal elite. I can see it now:

          My cat Fluffy is so cute when she curls up at my feet when I’m enjoying a hot cocoa.

          My Bootsy is so hillarious when he plays with his cat toys and they go under the refrigerator. I’m LOL

          Rob N. Hood-
          So just another thing the Libertarians (Tea Party) and the Leftys on the Left (Green) have in common. We are all getting fed up with the trashing of America and its middle class. Correct me if I’m wrong but it’s the extreme right who have been the first to actually start carrying around weapons. If things continue to go bad for the middle class there will be some kind of uprisings on both ends of the political spectrum. Your attempt to paint only the Left as the potentially violent ones is extremely silly, not to mention currently inaccurate.

          You think?!?!?

          • Jerk A. Knot February 2, 2011 at 12:46 pm #

            lol…. I needed that laugh. Oh no you caused me to expell more CO2… I hope I did not kill a baby seal……

  36. paul wenum February 1, 2011 at 9:45 pm #

    Agree. Climate changes daily. Like Neil says, back on point. Where’s Mann by the way? Indicted yet?

  37. Rob N. Hood February 2, 2011 at 8:08 am #

    Narrow-mindedness is not a virtue.

    • Jerk A. Knot February 2, 2011 at 12:47 pm #

      Then you are not virtuous because that seems to be all you have going.

  38. Rob N. Hood February 2, 2011 at 4:17 pm #

    Uh-huh. How’s that? When everyone complains that I’m “all over the place”, and “not on topic” and blah blah blah? Nope, narrow-mindedness ain’t my schtick brother, it’s your pals’ here on this narrow of narrowist sites. I’m all about expanding (or blowing) your minds with a fresh breeze of free speech and truthiness.

    Thank me now or thank me later. Either’s ok w/me.

    • NEIL F. AGWD/BSD February 2, 2011 at 8:36 pm #

      That’s just delusional.

  39. paul wenum February 2, 2011 at 10:02 pm #

    Must have a Napoleon complex.???

  40. Rob N. Hood February 3, 2011 at 8:09 am #

    Well your welcome anyway.

    Did you know that the U.S. public wants military spending cut? Did you know that President Barack Obama wants to increase it for his third year in a row? Actually I already know that most of you didn’t know either of these things.

    A poll released on Tuesday and in line with other polling over the years asked: “To ensure its safety, should the United States always spend at least three times as much on defense as any other nation?” This question mislabels the military “defense,” which most of it isn’t, and claims the interest of “safety,” albeit in the context of other questions about spending money, and yet only 25% of voters said yes, while 40% said no and 35% were not sure.

  41. Rob N. Hood February 3, 2011 at 11:09 am #

    American taxpayers, who have invested heavily (i.e. been brainwashed) in the “Global Military Supremacy” dogma, may have serious questions about whether it works. The evidence?

    “The chief lesson to emerge from the battlefields” since 9/11: “the Pentagon possesses next to no ability to translate military supremacy into meaningful victory,” according to Andrew Bacevich.” As a retired colonel, now teaching at Boston University, Professor Bacevich speaks with some authority.

    For several decades, blind faith in global military supremacy has been responsible for a waste of lives and vast resources, resulting in an unprecedented, annual military budget that exceeds all other military budgets combined: $700 billion. That’s enough money to feed, clothe, educate, and provide health care for every person in the world for several years, according to the UN Development Office.

    How often must that comparison be acknowledged before it results in serious debate about U.S. foreign policy? How long will it take for American Presidents and Congress to acknowledge that these wasted resources are an essential cause of our present economic recession?

    But… get ready for more hocus-pocus from lobbyists for sustaining this unprecedented military outlay when Congress debates the possibility of reducing it. We’ll hear variations on a Republican senator’s saying that he would never approve any reduction in military spending that might increase the vulnerability of our troops. If Congress were so concerned about the vulnerability of our troops, why does it keep sending them into wars-Korea, Vietnam, Iraq, Afghanistan-that end in either defeat or stalemates?

    • Jerk A. Knot February 3, 2011 at 1:39 pm #

      You are way out of your league on this one…. way over stretched. I am only going to point to one example of what military power can do. I really think it will debunk the assertions of this COL (Ret) you quote. 2 Brigades of our military sliced thru 6 Divisions of combat experienced troops in 2003. That is meaningful. What is meaning less was the outcry from the Liberal left to stay and fix what we destroyed. That always gets left out. Bush had an exit strategy. He was leaving. I know I saw the plans. I was there when they got scrapped and we had to restore the Iraqi people and protect them from Iran. It is much more convoluted than that but that is the just of it. Our military is unparalleled and capable of defeating any one or any collation of nations. It is the soft underbelly in the Diplomatic Corps that keeps us fighting for air.

  42. Rob N. Hood February 4, 2011 at 8:31 am #

    Uh huh. Sure. You betcha. If you say so. Reality, however, … says otherwise. I am not questioning our “military might.” Just the inability of it to actually solve real problems or even imagined problems effectively. In fact, that is NOT the real objective. The REAL objective to to continue wars as long as possible to keep the money flowing to the wealthy elite, i.e. MIC.

    What is it you don’t understand about that?

  43. paul wenum February 5, 2011 at 1:40 am #

    What is it that you don’t understand? Our military is to protect and to serve our republic. Not what you perceive, but all Americans. If another country needs assistance we are there to assist them. Is it always politically correct or PC? No. We have the best trained, armed soldiers in the world that are in battle as I type. Are companies making money off war? Yes. Friends of mine have son’s in battle and for example some work for Federal Cartridge that makes their ammunition. The money does not always go to the “elites.” My father designed the gun turrets for the B24 Bombers in WWII and I have the first shell casing on my mantle. Did he profit? No! Man, get your life straight when it comes to “Reality.” With your negativity it is funny that you even have a life. Suggest that you grow up and research more before you type. Of course there will be a bombastic reply. What else would be expected from the left liberal Robbie. Can hardly wait.

  44. Rob N. Hood February 7, 2011 at 7:34 am #

    You head is buried in the sands of propaganda. You point to anicdotal evidence that “not all the the money goes to the elite.” Did I ever say it did? (nope, only the vast majority of it does) Before WWII we had a pretty good peace-time economy going until the elite screwed it up like they are doing now (i.e. the great depression, and our great recession). WWII changed all that ( a necessary war, more or less). Ever since then we’ve become more and more addicted to war, and oil, and the elite use both to feed their money and power addiction. Plain and smiple.

    You and yours will apparently never be able to pull it out and see reality.

  45. paul wenum February 7, 2011 at 8:38 pm #

    Pre-WWII? What have you been smoking? It is a quite apparent that you know about pre-WWII and the economy. Life was not good. My father, father-In-Law and grandfather used to tak about what they went throught prior to WWII and thereafter. You being beyond reality is being nice in my brief comment. You have no idea for which you speak. Swear you must be a high school child. Note that you love to cut and paste and when you do post your comments it is all left wing/socialist hate speech with liberal “alleged facts” behind it. You will never change.

  46. Rob N. Hood February 8, 2011 at 7:55 am #

    The 20’s were prosperous times for many, but not all of course, I never said they were. A peace time economy that was growing slowly but steadily. Would I want us to be living in a time like that now? No of course not. I was not saying that- just making a valid point… of which you once again disregard with nothing more than anecdotes and ad hominen’s.

    WWII ushered in the MIC and the war economy as a sure bet for the wealthy elite. But what’s a war economy without war? Logic and reason…. try it sometime.

  47. Rob N. Hood February 8, 2011 at 8:00 am #

    BTW you refer to the time prior to WWII, which by then the Great Depression had occurred (1929) and people the world over were still recovering from it. And it (the Great Depression) was perhaps the main cause of WWII. No wonder things were bad? Who is the high school student? I’d give you an F.

    Also- did Socialists, Communists, etc. cause the Great Depression (or even our Great Recession)? Nope. The capitalists did. Wake up.

  48. paul wenum February 8, 2011 at 6:25 pm #

    Love how you re-write history. Sound like Al Gore and Global warming.

  49. Rob N. Hood February 9, 2011 at 7:44 am #

    I did? How so? Please, I’d like to know.

    How’s this suit you?:

    Bush and Cheney and their corporate masters had Middle Eastern Hegemony on their minds from the get go. They wanted to get US troops there in control of as much Middle Eastern oil as possible. 9-11 was just a good excuse.

    They understood that China is rising, and they understood American bankers’ plans to sell off US manufacturing infrastructure to the Chinese, and they also knew that the US could not allow unlimited access by the Chinese manufacturing giant to Middle Eastern Oil. In other words, Run up US debt to the max by printing enormous amounts of dollars and forcing it upon the world (Twelve trillion now), and then having US military control of the Middle East and its oil which forces China and other industrial nations to buy up US debt in the form of US reserve dollars (debt certificates) which they must have to buy oil from the Middle East and elsewhere since oil is traded in US dollars, and we are willing to kill anyone who does otherwise.

    Saddam double crossed Rumsfeld and Cheney and big oil America when he became belligerent and offered to sell his oil in Euros.

    So, he became a target for US destruction. These old boyz felt that Saddam and the world needed an object lesson in US power and our willingness to use it.

    So, they crushed Saddam, hung him, tortured his citizens and generally destroyed Iraq and its people simply as an object lesson for any other nation that tries to get too big for its britches.

    These people, GW Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld and Rice are the lieutenants of the billionaire rulers who run Wall Street and the global oil conglomerates. The people of the world, including the American and Japanese and even the Chinese people are piss ants in their eyes. Even Bush and Cheney and Rumsfeld are seen as mere highly paid lackeys by the moneyed elites.

  50. paul wenum February 9, 2011 at 7:17 pm #

    You just made my point.

A project of Minnesota Majority, hosted and maintained by Minnesotans for Global Warming.