Until China and India and Africa join the effort what we do is very minimal at best. However with the green deal from the Dems even with this minimal impact we can careen right into bankruptcy without passing go.
Fossil fuels are important; so is nuclear energy. FF are fine as far as carbon goes - witness the many studies that show carbon is Necessary and a good thing. The emissions are not causing climate change.
Here’s the latest and greatest, folks. 
And here’s some news, from today’s Patheos’ Catholic newsletter.
Did this last article, utilize a cuss word (AKA Democrat)?
Steve said:
My wife and i both have hybrid cars getting over 50 MPG. But you still need natural gas to create the electricity for electric cars.
I have a sports car, It is fast and fun. It gets 26ish on the hyway. I love it and it is this bravado that catapulted untold folks to find and create new ways of dealing with transportation.
Steve said:
the issue is how much do we want to gut the economy to speed up the rate of change
That is a fairly non relative statement. Progress, in and of itself is good as long as the outcome is obtainable by the majority of those who the change was pointed at. The thinkers and good mongers are by themselves trying to change for the better. But I have a suspicion that many are (at least here in the USA,) woefully ignorant of many of the everyday peoples plight. But they do go ahead and push their agenda, albeit in most cases it is skewed and not realistic.
1 Like
Sheer assertion about the effects of pollution are bound to convince scientists 
1 Like
I think Iran “changed its mind”. 
It’s almost like the food server, changing her mind - about giving the guest salt, for his food.
" Dreher adds:
There are things worse than a president who is radically pro-abortion, opposed to religious liberty, and favoring open borders. It’s having a president who recklessly endangers the lives of people for the sake of winding up a mob.
A perspicacious comment by one ‘Seoulite’:
Future scholars: these sentences exemplify the “Polite Conservative” . . . . According to the Polite Conservative, someone who actively supports the annual murder of hundreds of thousands of innocent human beings (radically pro-abortion), the punitive imposition of radical progressivism and the trouncing of freedom of conscience in the public space (religious liberty), and the actual destruction of the nation itself (open borders); such a person is preferable to someone who insults the Polite Conservative’s sense of decorum and acceptable discourse.
Above all one must be polite and courteous, even as an invited guest insults you in your own house, even as uninvited guests smash the windows and clamber in, even as the house itself burns and knives are at your children’s throats, you must be polite and not wind anybody up.
–anon, quoted in https://maverickphilosopher.typepad.com/maverick_philosopher/2019/08/the-main-thing-is-to-be-polite.html?fbclid=IwAR3oBLiZMw5CWNReI_A3R2YJHhVSTCAREGxFunTCPo4eVkxTt7f4BjbZzJI
Must say, that statement by Dreher - good as he is at other things - is deplorable.
Perspicacious indeed. Probably would’ve benefitted from knowing that word long ago–long, long ago–when I took the SAT’s.
Me too. Back in the day, we took the SATS without ‘studying’ for them! I was shocked to find out that nowadays, one can take a short course in how to do better on those tests. Seems unfair, but with competition being what it is, maybe it’s necessary.
This sounds exactly like the rhetoric my leftist friends mock to justify a radical assault upon others and our supposedly dangerous system. I don’t accept such an argument for dismissing all civility or gracious Christian behavior.
1 Like
Here’s some insight on the Middle East:
https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=10157875840283584&set=a.10150319423478584&type=3&eid=ARBIpPfGX1NVSE8BA6OJpcMpYDxBoWSJ_D-uyNpVjl8x2I0yMjGEp3RCNkWWTxXUJAmjSSwTsDjTmXs8
Even Iranian citizens are “mad as hell”.
I think we’ve all noticed this:
" Trump almost started World War III. Trump almost catalyzed the entire destruction of the Kurds. Trump almost started war with North Korea. Trump almost started a full-blown war between the Palestinian-Arabs and the Israelis. Trump almost devastated the economy by slapping tariffs on Chinese goods. See how much heavy-lifting the word “almost” is doing? It’s utterly bizarre, because these predictions never happen.
The word’s subjunctive quality has become a shield for the media as they predict wild policy outcomes that have no grounding in the facts. When President Trump moved the U.S. embassy to Jerusalem, we were essentially promised insurmountable bloodshed and the irrevocable destruction of any hope at peace in the region. Thankfully, we got neither. But that didn’t stop reporters from sheepishly convincing themselves that, although their prediction never achieved fruition, it still could have happened.
That is the same dance being rehearsed now on Iran. Our firefighting media know the steps so well. The beauty of almost – and its ugly step-child could have – is that these reporters never have to be right for something to be almost true.
By all accounts, President Trump’s performance vis-à-vis Iran was stunningly effective at reestablishing the policy of deterrence (rather than appeasement) in the region. However, media reporting as of late has made it abundantly clear that wild projections of what could have been will continue to far eclipse what actually was. And the only people who suffer from such bombastic “analysis” are those who are forced to rely on it, given most people’s understandably limited knowledge of Middle Eastern geopolitics.
There’s a gross irresponsibility in such “reporting” and signals the ever-growing credibility crisis of the American media."
"Media is Always, ALWAYS Wrong about Trump." That kind of selective and extremist generalization by his enthusiats may allow me to post an equally extremist piece by an ‘enemy’ Never Trumper calculated to similarly push the buttons of our North American Always Trumper advocates.
Thanks, Bob, for that timely reminder you offered that the US media is absolutely (well 90% of them) against Trump, can’t report on him accurately, and basically loathe him. Canadian media are no better but not as blatantly biased against as the Los Angeles Times. UK media are not much better although some of the dailies (The Mail, Daily Express, Telegraph) are very fair by comparison.
Oh, wait a minute. You didn’t really mean to say that, did you Bob?
It took the American mass disinformation media and the socialists Democrats three years of Trump’s presidency to finally develop a coherent policy of confronting Trump.
This policy is very primitive: everything that Trump does is denied, rejected, and negated. Everything.
As a result, the opposition’s reaction began to resemble the reaction of Pavlovian dogs — any statement by Trump, any action by Trump, and any achievement of Trump can cause only one thing — salivation of total negation.
However, the complete and unconditional denial of everything makes the Democrats predictable and, as a result, vulnerable and easily amenable to manipulation and provocation.
The White House probably noticed this a long time ago, and it will certainly take advantage of the thoughtless but predictable denial by the Democrats of absolutely everything for their political purposes. -Gary Gindler
Except for the BBC news, that is.
Of course, there are many folks here…who are part of Trump’s inner circle…and are privileged to see, objective and first-hand info on Trump.
And if you believe that, then I have some:
I’ll end by quoting something, from today’s CAC newsletter.
In order to become truly prophetic people who go beyond the categories of liberal and conservative, we have to teach and learn ways to integrate needed activism with a truly contemplative mind and heart. I’m convinced that once we learn how to look out at life from the contemplative eyes of the True Self, personal politics and economics are going to change on their own. I don’t need to tell you what your politics should or shouldn’t be. Once you see things contemplatively, you’ll begin to seek the bias toward the bottom (not the top, which is far too defended and idealized), you’ll be free to embrace your shadow, and you can live at peace with those who are different. From a contemplative stance, you’ll know what action is yours to do almost naturally. And what you do not need to do at all!
From Stu Cvrk at RedState today, this looks interesting:
“The Democrat Impeachment: An Attempted Coup That Violated the US Constitution”
Here is an excerpt:
Pelosi refused to allow President Trump to have legal representation or to have any witnesses in his defense during the least thorough, most rushed, and most unfair Democrat “kangaroo court” impeachment in the 246-year history of the nation. The two Articles of Impeachment did not specify high crimes or misdemeanors nor did they specify any crimes were committed at all, yet the flawed partisan impeachment was approved by a rushed vote of only Democrats in the US House of Representatives.
Article II of the US Constitution specifies that the US President can be impeached for “treason, bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeanors.” Article II states that a US president must have committed a CRIMINAL offense before he can be impeached. President Trump did not commit a criminal offense. He was impeached for (a) Obstruction of Democrats in Congress (not a federal crime) and (b) for Abuse of Power (not a federal crime). Pelosi’s Democrats violated and subverted the US Constitution by voting to approve impeachment based on no crime.
It’s understandable. I’ve never see our alliances with free nations this weakened.