Serious Conundra on Nukes and Murder
You just never know about nukes and murder and the issues they are capable of causing.
National Geographic reported recently on a real conundrum for Al Gore and his global warming set: Global warming could be easily alleviated with just a little nuclear war. The planet wouldn’t even have to endure a nuclear winter resulting in massive starvation and disease, just a relatively non-catastrophic explosion of, say, 15 million tons of tnt-equivalent bombs.
There would, though, be significant negatives associated with those mini-nukes namely that, “Even a regional nuclear war could spark ‘unprecedented’ global cooling and reduce rainfall for years, according to U.S. government computer models. Widespread famine and disease would likely follow, experts speculate:” http://tiny.cc/pswsr
The title of the National Geographic piece, “Small Nuclear War Could Reverse Global Warming for Years,” almost suggests Al and his cohorts would relish that scenario, since reversal of global warming is their goal, no? However, such an eventuality would also put them out of business, thereby creating that conundrum. The Warmists would have to weigh the global benefits of nuclear detonations against the detriments to their wallets.
Then, again, they’re a flexible bunch. They can even twist cold winters into proofs of a warming planet, They would probably establish a start-up dedicated to reaping profits from the nuclear devastation.
What WILL Al and his jolly warmists do?
And what will the country do if President Barack Hussein Obama were ever shot?
That bodacious query . . .
(Read more at http://www.genelalor.com/blog1/?p=3760)
Monday, February 28, 2011
The Un-Fan Club Chimes In
The Un-Fan Club Chimes In
Blogsite comments are the lifeblood of a blog. They can also be entertaining. The following are a few received recently, printed verbatim with editorial commentary in brackets and italics where visible.
From “lonsberg” comes a very dubious accolade in reference to “What’s With All the Jew-Bashing?” (http://www.genelalor.com/blog1/?p=3756)
“I like your site–a lot. Still, I think you too are a kook when it comes to Israel and the Jews. You betray yourself with the Versaille bit. [Pardonnez-moi? Hitler rose to power by railing against the Treaty of Versailles and linking the ascendancy of Jews with Germany's economic catastrophe.] Versaille had nothing to do with the rise of Naziism–it was just a cheap way to score points with the disgruntled workies and unionistas especially. [My points NEVER come cheap!] The terms of the treaty were lenient. [Lenient? In addition to conceding valuable territories, exorbitant, punitive reparations totaling the equivalent of $385 billion in today's dollars were imposed, crippling Germany's future and leading to WWII.] Its like today’s Egyptians saying that the Camp David accord is a “humiliation”. Right. And at the end, you say this is “not healthy, especially for the Jews”. You are normally a cogent thinker, and writer, ]Thank you!] but this makes no sense. If you meant to say, this is “dangerous” for the Jews, why didn’t you say that? Because you have a blind spot. Unconsciously, you are saying that the Jews are not healthy, that’s why. Because you cannot admit that the Jews are fine thank you very much, that America and the Free World owes is legacy to Jewish law and ethics, and that it is society-at-large (as usual) that is going off the rails. That is what is not healthy– for you, and for all of us. [I would prefer not to be psychoanalyzed but, for the record, the "fineness" of Jews is irrelevant and my reference to "healthy" was intended euphemistically to mean that there are distinct suggestions that, if a new Holocaust is not in the making, the rise of anti-Semitism could signal even worse attacks to come which, yes, is very dangerous.]“
“Hey” extends no accolades but does wield a few brickbats re: “Our United Nations, Our World, Our Folly,” http://www.genelalor.com/blog1/?p=3751. . .
(Read more at http://www.genelalor.com/blog1/?p=3762)
Blogsite comments are the lifeblood of a blog. They can also be entertaining. The following are a few received recently, printed verbatim with editorial commentary in brackets and italics where visible.
From “lonsberg” comes a very dubious accolade in reference to “What’s With All the Jew-Bashing?” (http://www.genelalor.com/blog1/?p=3756)
“I like your site–a lot. Still, I think you too are a kook when it comes to Israel and the Jews. You betray yourself with the Versaille bit. [Pardonnez-moi? Hitler rose to power by railing against the Treaty of Versailles and linking the ascendancy of Jews with Germany's economic catastrophe.] Versaille had nothing to do with the rise of Naziism–it was just a cheap way to score points with the disgruntled workies and unionistas especially. [My points NEVER come cheap!] The terms of the treaty were lenient. [Lenient? In addition to conceding valuable territories, exorbitant, punitive reparations totaling the equivalent of $385 billion in today's dollars were imposed, crippling Germany's future and leading to WWII.] Its like today’s Egyptians saying that the Camp David accord is a “humiliation”. Right. And at the end, you say this is “not healthy, especially for the Jews”. You are normally a cogent thinker, and writer, ]Thank you!] but this makes no sense. If you meant to say, this is “dangerous” for the Jews, why didn’t you say that? Because you have a blind spot. Unconsciously, you are saying that the Jews are not healthy, that’s why. Because you cannot admit that the Jews are fine thank you very much, that America and the Free World owes is legacy to Jewish law and ethics, and that it is society-at-large (as usual) that is going off the rails. That is what is not healthy– for you, and for all of us. [I would prefer not to be psychoanalyzed but, for the record, the "fineness" of Jews is irrelevant and my reference to "healthy" was intended euphemistically to mean that there are distinct suggestions that, if a new Holocaust is not in the making, the rise of anti-Semitism could signal even worse attacks to come which, yes, is very dangerous.]“
“Hey” extends no accolades but does wield a few brickbats re: “Our United Nations, Our World, Our Folly,” http://www.genelalor.com/blog1/?p=3751. . .
(Read more at http://www.genelalor.com/blog1/?p=3762)
Sunday, February 27, 2011
What's With All the Jew-Bashing?
What's With All the Jew Bashing?
There’s a certain undercurrent out there which seems more and more to be bubbling up to surface current status and it’s not good news for those of the Jewish extraction.
In Europe, where anti-Semitism reached its apogee in Germany and Austria following the punitive features of the Treaty of Versailles and the rise of Naziism, England has now become a hotbed of violence against Jews and the ADL is reporting significant anti-Semitism in France, Poland, and Hungary, as well as in Germany and Austria.
Here at home, Mel Gibson’s drunken tirade against a Jewish cop in Malibu in 2006 in which he allegedly said, “F**king Jews . . The Jews are responsible for all the wars in the world,” made headlines worldwide and his girlfriend, Oksana Grigorieva dug his Hollywood hole even deeper when she revealed he once said, ”I want Jew blood on my hands.” Gibson is now gone, Oksana is suing him, he’s countersuing, and the cop, Deputy James Mee, is suing the LAPD.
Anyone else need a scorecard? It never seems to end, not just the court battles but the tirades.
Last summer, the leftist and Buddhist movie director Oliver Stone seemed to be channeling Gibson when he said, “Hitler did far more damage to the Russians than the Jewish people.”
Stone asked then answered his own question, “Why such a focus on the Holocaust then? The Jewish domination of the media. . ."
(Read more at http://www.genelalor.com/blog1/?p=3756)
There’s a certain undercurrent out there which seems more and more to be bubbling up to surface current status and it’s not good news for those of the Jewish extraction.
In Europe, where anti-Semitism reached its apogee in Germany and Austria following the punitive features of the Treaty of Versailles and the rise of Naziism, England has now become a hotbed of violence against Jews and the ADL is reporting significant anti-Semitism in France, Poland, and Hungary, as well as in Germany and Austria.
Here at home, Mel Gibson’s drunken tirade against a Jewish cop in Malibu in 2006 in which he allegedly said, “F**king Jews . . The Jews are responsible for all the wars in the world,” made headlines worldwide and his girlfriend, Oksana Grigorieva dug his Hollywood hole even deeper when she revealed he once said, ”I want Jew blood on my hands.” Gibson is now gone, Oksana is suing him, he’s countersuing, and the cop, Deputy James Mee, is suing the LAPD.
Anyone else need a scorecard? It never seems to end, not just the court battles but the tirades.
Last summer, the leftist and Buddhist movie director Oliver Stone seemed to be channeling Gibson when he said, “Hitler did far more damage to the Russians than the Jewish people.”
Stone asked then answered his own question, “Why such a focus on the Holocaust then? The Jewish domination of the media. . ."
(Read more at http://www.genelalor.com/blog1/?p=3756)
Our United Nations, Our World, Our Folly
Our United Nations, Our World, Our Folly
We should all treasure the United Nations. As its website proclaims, “It’s your world!” According to that website, “The U.N. has 4 main purposes
To keep peace throughout the world;
To develop friendly relations among nations;
To help nations work together to improve the lives of poor people, to conquer hunger, disease and illiteracy, and to encourage respect for each other’s rights and freedoms;
To be a centre for harmonizing the actions of nations to achieve these goals.”
What rational being, what American, what Zambizean or Moldavian or Kazakhstanian could take issue with that lofty dedication to peace, friendliness, respect, and harmony among nations, none of which the U.N. has come even close to realizing?
Forget the origins of the U.N., the sleazey ngotiations that led to its founding, the able assistance in that endeavor of convicted Soviet spy and perjurer, Alger Hiss. Forget its repetitive, abject failures in the 66 years of its existence, the presence of China, Cuba, and Libya on its “Human Rights Council,” its consistently anti-Americanism over the years. The U.N. is “our world.”
The United Nations began with 51 nations after World War II and has now blossomed into a bloated membership of 192 countries, most of which have, if not outright contempt for its chief benefactor, the United States, a studied, diplomatic disregard for our interests.
Despite all the negatives, the U.N. has evolved into the international organization par excellence, the organization that has been impotent in ending the unending wars since WWII, the last best hope for mankind. Oh, it also dispatches kids on Halloween to beg for UNICEF money.
The U.N. Secretary General, Ban Ki-moon of the Republic of South Korea, just announced an exciting new initiative.
For some historical perspective, Mr. Ban succeeded Ghanian Kofi Annan. Annan had followed Egypt’s D.r. Boutros Boutros-Ghali and personally presided over the genocide in Rwanda. He was rewarded for that disservice with the office of Secretary General. Wearing his new hat, he oversaw a U.N. sex harrassment scandal, the Oil-for-Food Scandal, and his son, Kojo Annan raking off millions in that mess.
Kofi was again rewarded, with a Nobel Peace Prize.
Anyway, in recognition of the United Nations’ “World Day of Social Justice,” . . .
(Read more at http://www.genelalor.com/blog1/?p=3751)
We should all treasure the United Nations. As its website proclaims, “It’s your world!” According to that website, “The U.N. has 4 main purposes
To keep peace throughout the world;
To develop friendly relations among nations;
To help nations work together to improve the lives of poor people, to conquer hunger, disease and illiteracy, and to encourage respect for each other’s rights and freedoms;
To be a centre for harmonizing the actions of nations to achieve these goals.”
What rational being, what American, what Zambizean or Moldavian or Kazakhstanian could take issue with that lofty dedication to peace, friendliness, respect, and harmony among nations, none of which the U.N. has come even close to realizing?
Forget the origins of the U.N., the sleazey ngotiations that led to its founding, the able assistance in that endeavor of convicted Soviet spy and perjurer, Alger Hiss. Forget its repetitive, abject failures in the 66 years of its existence, the presence of China, Cuba, and Libya on its “Human Rights Council,” its consistently anti-Americanism over the years. The U.N. is “our world.”
The United Nations began with 51 nations after World War II and has now blossomed into a bloated membership of 192 countries, most of which have, if not outright contempt for its chief benefactor, the United States, a studied, diplomatic disregard for our interests.
Despite all the negatives, the U.N. has evolved into the international organization par excellence, the organization that has been impotent in ending the unending wars since WWII, the last best hope for mankind. Oh, it also dispatches kids on Halloween to beg for UNICEF money.
The U.N. Secretary General, Ban Ki-moon of the Republic of South Korea, just announced an exciting new initiative.
For some historical perspective, Mr. Ban succeeded Ghanian Kofi Annan. Annan had followed Egypt’s D.r. Boutros Boutros-Ghali and personally presided over the genocide in Rwanda. He was rewarded for that disservice with the office of Secretary General. Wearing his new hat, he oversaw a U.N. sex harrassment scandal, the Oil-for-Food Scandal, and his son, Kojo Annan raking off millions in that mess.
Kofi was again rewarded, with a Nobel Peace Prize.
Anyway, in recognition of the United Nations’ “World Day of Social Justice,” . . .
(Read more at http://www.genelalor.com/blog1/?p=3751)
FDR and Union Tyranny
FDR and Union Tyranny
As a former, retired, teacher union member whose father was a member of a company union, I don’t in the least feel hypocritical in opposing the actions of Wisconsin teachers. Bottom line is, they’re wrong, in the extreme.
When I began as a public school English teacher in the early 70′s in suburban Long Island, I had no intention of joining either the local or state unions. Even then, the state union was decidedly liberal and, in fact, there was a movement afoot to expunge the word, “union,” in favor of “association” in order to preserve a sense of teacher professionalism.
“Union” won out in that debate, not that it mattered since the umbrella organization, the National Education Association, the NEA, which partners with the American Federation of Teachers, the AFT, is a de facto union, with 3.2 million members.
In any event, during my first year I refused on principle to join the local but succumbed in my second after repeated interruptions of my class by an importuning union rep. As it turned out, I subsequently learned that the district administration, in conjunction with the union, frowned on those who didn’t join and if I hadn’t signed on I may not have had a job my third year.
With that as preface and introduction to the current education crisis in Madison, Wisconsin and elsewhere, it’s been more than disquieting to discover that I was at least in partial agreement with the greatest liberal icon in the history of liberal icons, President Franklin Delano Roosevelt.
Not that FDR was opposed to unions or collective bargaining–far from it–but he knew the inherent dangers of public employees negotiating with governments via union representatives.
As he said, ”All government employees should realize that the process of collective bargaining, as usually understood, cannot be transplanted into public service. It has its distinct and insurmountable limitations when applied to public-personnel management. The very nature and purposes of government make it impossible for administrative officials to represent fully or to bind the employer in mutual discussions with government employee organizations:” http://tiny.cc/pnwwf
Apparently, today’s public employee unions never got that message as to the “insurmountable limitations” and the impossibility of such situations. Nor can they seem to grasp FDR’s reminder that, in collective bargaining with governments, “The employer is the whole people,” meaning that, seated on the other side of the negotiating table, are not representatives of some greedy corporation but the American public.
Extrapolating from Roosevelt’s words, when public employee unions demonstrate and agitate and demand, they are demonstrating and agitating against “the whole people” and their demands are not being made against a mayor, governor, or president but rather against every taxpayer.
President Ronald Reagan . . .
(Read more at http://www.genelalor.com/blog1/?p=3744)
As a former, retired, teacher union member whose father was a member of a company union, I don’t in the least feel hypocritical in opposing the actions of Wisconsin teachers. Bottom line is, they’re wrong, in the extreme.
When I began as a public school English teacher in the early 70′s in suburban Long Island, I had no intention of joining either the local or state unions. Even then, the state union was decidedly liberal and, in fact, there was a movement afoot to expunge the word, “union,” in favor of “association” in order to preserve a sense of teacher professionalism.
“Union” won out in that debate, not that it mattered since the umbrella organization, the National Education Association, the NEA, which partners with the American Federation of Teachers, the AFT, is a de facto union, with 3.2 million members.
In any event, during my first year I refused on principle to join the local but succumbed in my second after repeated interruptions of my class by an importuning union rep. As it turned out, I subsequently learned that the district administration, in conjunction with the union, frowned on those who didn’t join and if I hadn’t signed on I may not have had a job my third year.
With that as preface and introduction to the current education crisis in Madison, Wisconsin and elsewhere, it’s been more than disquieting to discover that I was at least in partial agreement with the greatest liberal icon in the history of liberal icons, President Franklin Delano Roosevelt.
Not that FDR was opposed to unions or collective bargaining–far from it–but he knew the inherent dangers of public employees negotiating with governments via union representatives.
As he said, ”All government employees should realize that the process of collective bargaining, as usually understood, cannot be transplanted into public service. It has its distinct and insurmountable limitations when applied to public-personnel management. The very nature and purposes of government make it impossible for administrative officials to represent fully or to bind the employer in mutual discussions with government employee organizations:” http://tiny.cc/pnwwf
Apparently, today’s public employee unions never got that message as to the “insurmountable limitations” and the impossibility of such situations. Nor can they seem to grasp FDR’s reminder that, in collective bargaining with governments, “The employer is the whole people,” meaning that, seated on the other side of the negotiating table, are not representatives of some greedy corporation but the American public.
Extrapolating from Roosevelt’s words, when public employee unions demonstrate and agitate and demand, they are demonstrating and agitating against “the whole people” and their demands are not being made against a mayor, governor, or president but rather against every taxpayer.
President Ronald Reagan . . .
(Read more at http://www.genelalor.com/blog1/?p=3744)
Saturday, February 26, 2011
NY Republicans Still Out in Left Field
NY Republicans Still Out in Left Field
Some people are just slow learners.
The New York Republican Party establishment, in which “Rockefeller Republicans” still hold sway, falls into that category. Someone should remind them of what happened nationwide on November 2nd when a resurgent conservative movement gave notice that there was a resurgent conservative movement.
You may recall that old brand of liberal, pseudo-Republicanism dating back to the late fifties which included such illuminati as Nelson Rockefeller, Jacob Javits, and Louis Lefkowitz who were all confirmed RINOs long before the term was created. To a man, they opposed Barry Goldwater for president in 1964 and managed over the years to make the New York Republican Party indistinguishable from the Democrats.
Back in 2009, new age RINOs demonstrated they still knew how to win elections–for Democrats. Then, the New York Conservative Party nominated Doug Hoffman for Congress in a special election in the upstate 23rd CD. Backed by Sarah Palin and the Tea Party and opposed by confirmed RINO Dede Scozzafava and by GOP bigwigs, Hoffman was the clear favorite.
Long story short: Scozzafava dropped out of the race, appropriately on Halloween, endorsed Democrat Bill Owen, and Owen won by 2.3%
Fast forward to 2011 and another upstate special election, in New York’s 26th CD, the seat vacated by Chris Lee after he opted to audition as a centerfold instead of continuing as a congressman. . .
(Read more at http://www.genelalor.com/blog1/?p=3742)
Some people are just slow learners.
The New York Republican Party establishment, in which “Rockefeller Republicans” still hold sway, falls into that category. Someone should remind them of what happened nationwide on November 2nd when a resurgent conservative movement gave notice that there was a resurgent conservative movement.
You may recall that old brand of liberal, pseudo-Republicanism dating back to the late fifties which included such illuminati as Nelson Rockefeller, Jacob Javits, and Louis Lefkowitz who were all confirmed RINOs long before the term was created. To a man, they opposed Barry Goldwater for president in 1964 and managed over the years to make the New York Republican Party indistinguishable from the Democrats.
Back in 2009, new age RINOs demonstrated they still knew how to win elections–for Democrats. Then, the New York Conservative Party nominated Doug Hoffman for Congress in a special election in the upstate 23rd CD. Backed by Sarah Palin and the Tea Party and opposed by confirmed RINO Dede Scozzafava and by GOP bigwigs, Hoffman was the clear favorite.
Long story short: Scozzafava dropped out of the race, appropriately on Halloween, endorsed Democrat Bill Owen, and Owen won by 2.3%
Fast forward to 2011 and another upstate special election, in New York’s 26th CD, the seat vacated by Chris Lee after he opted to audition as a centerfold instead of continuing as a congressman. . .
(Read more at http://www.genelalor.com/blog1/?p=3742)
Billboards and Al Sharpton's Black Genocide
Billboards and Al Sharpton's Black Genocide
Nothing riles the Reverend Alfred Charles “Al” Sharpton more than an attack on his people, you know, those people who who throw money his way and enable him to avoid doing an honest day’s work, unless you consider 24/7 racial agitating work. That is, nothing raises his hackles as much as hard truth.
Reverend Al got into a royal snit over a billboard erected in New York City’s posh SoHo district which depicted a pretty, young black girl under the caption, “THE MOST Dangerous Place For An African-American IS IN THE WOMB.”
Sponsored and paid for by the anti-abortion group, Life Always, and by ThatsAbortion.com, http://thatsabortion.com/, the billboard, situated half a mile from a Planned Parenthood abortion mill and erected in recognition of Black History Month, had a shelf/wall life of four days before threats by Reverend Al forced its removal.
It was deemed objectionable by Sharpton and his henchmen on the bases that it was ”an offensive and condescending effort to stigmatize and shame African-American women while attempting to discredit the work of Planned Parenthood” and “sends a message of racial profiling and discourages a woman’s right to choose.”
Offensive, condescending, stigmatizing, shameful, not to mention discrediting, profiling, and discouraging? The ironies could not be richer, the pathos no more sad. . .
(Read more at http://www.genelalor.com/blog1/?p=3739)
Nothing riles the Reverend Alfred Charles “Al” Sharpton more than an attack on his people, you know, those people who who throw money his way and enable him to avoid doing an honest day’s work, unless you consider 24/7 racial agitating work. That is, nothing raises his hackles as much as hard truth.
Reverend Al got into a royal snit over a billboard erected in New York City’s posh SoHo district which depicted a pretty, young black girl under the caption, “THE MOST Dangerous Place For An African-American IS IN THE WOMB.”
Sponsored and paid for by the anti-abortion group, Life Always, and by ThatsAbortion.com, http://thatsabortion.com/, the billboard, situated half a mile from a Planned Parenthood abortion mill and erected in recognition of Black History Month, had a shelf/wall life of four days before threats by Reverend Al forced its removal.
It was deemed objectionable by Sharpton and his henchmen on the bases that it was ”an offensive and condescending effort to stigmatize and shame African-American women while attempting to discredit the work of Planned Parenthood” and “sends a message of racial profiling and discourages a woman’s right to choose.”
Offensive, condescending, stigmatizing, shameful, not to mention discrediting, profiling, and discouraging? The ironies could not be richer, the pathos no more sad. . .
(Read more at http://www.genelalor.com/blog1/?p=3739)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)