bushmanbilly
Cave Dweller
Member since October 2008
Posts: 4,719
|
Post by bushmanbilly on Apr 22, 2013 11:59:18 GMT -5
No coincidence Earth Day is Lenin’s birthdayApril 22 is Earth Day. Very appropriately, and not by any means coincidentally, Earth Day is celebrated on the birthday of the socialist tyrant Vladimir Lenin. It’s appropriate that the two are celebrated on the same day, because there is no relevant difference between the socialist and environmentalist agendas in this country. Saving the environment is simply a euphemism for eviscerating the rights of property owners and creating a dictatorship. But you already know that; the purpose of this column is to illustrate how much of our current debate on a host of contentious issues can be explained by looking to the environmental movement. Essentially, the insatiability of the environmentalists for restricting property rights is a powerful motivation for activists of all stripes to reject any initiative of their opponents, however reasonable. Whatever anyone’s agenda may be, the environmentalists have taught us all that acceding to the opponent does not satisfy the beast’s hunger, but only makes the beast stronger and more dangerous. I remember drinking out of the Milwaukee River when I was young. Let me tell you, it was not the relatively pristine waterway that it is today; it was disgusting. But if you were thirsty enough, you drank out of it anyway. I remember when the whole city of Milwaukee smelled like filth because of the air pollution – all day, every day. Now, the government occasionally declares “Action Days.” Of course, even on the worst “Action Day,” the air is fine – infinitely better than it was every single day back in the 1970s. And if the government didn’t announce them, no one would even know that, by some Earth muffin’s arbitrary standards, the air was “unhealthy” that day. And yet, the environmentalists will not declare victory. Instead, they have invented the myth of anthropogenic global warming. Property owners have discovered that their compromises with the environmentalists did not solve anything. Their agenda will never end, until western civilization is destroyed and we return to the Stone Age. It is because the environmentalists’ insane agenda is so clear, and has so far been so successful, that other activists, like supporters of abortion rights and the right to bear arms, know they must employ knee-jerk reflexive opposition to any and all proposals of their opponents. Suppose, for example, that opponents of the Second Amendment propose a restriction on gun ownership that is genuinely a reasonable one. Many supporters of the right to bear arms have to oppose it anyway, simply because they know what the real goal of their opponents is – to totally disarm the citizenry and leave it wholly at the mercy of a socialist police state. It is the same with abortion. Many abortion rights activists don’t actually oppose any and all limitations on abortion. But they must oppose any restriction of abortion-on-demand, because they know that the ultimate goal of their opponents is criminalization of all abortions. And once they get that, their goal will be to increase the maximum prison sentences for women who get abortions. And once they get that, they’ll lobby for mandatory minimums. And so on. These folks know, from the success of the environmentalists in eliminating property rights, that every success of their opponents will merely embolden them. Their opponents will never decide that what they’ve accomplished is good enough and go home; they will always be there, always pushing for more. So, if you’ve ever wondered why it seems that reasonable people have lost the ability to reach reasonable compromises, look to the environmentalists for your answer. That is the lesson to be learned on Earth Day.wislawjournal.com/2010/04/26/commentary-no-coincidence-earth-day-is-lenins-birthday/
|
|
|
Post by helens on Apr 22, 2013 12:25:25 GMT -5
What the heck is this? At the core, everyone alive is an environmentalist. Because if we have no environment, we would die. And if we wanted to die, we wouldn't be posting on forums, we'd go out in the backyard and kill ourselves.
The perception that someone wants to screw up your environment is a personal one and depends on where you live. If you like walking in the woods, and picking mushrooms under giant Redwoods that have been there for 5000 years, you will get MAD at greedy loggers who want to chop it down, and you will find any excuse you can to stop it.
If you live in Arkansas, and your backyard is flooded with toxic tar sands muck that just killed your dog, you want them to stop it.
No one wants anyone else to piss in their drinking water, and you can label it for convenience, but we're all environmentalists.
|
|
blarneystone
spending too much on rocks
Rocks in my head
Member since March 2010
Posts: 307
|
Post by blarneystone on Apr 22, 2013 12:31:44 GMT -5
April 22nd is also the day that U.S. Congress passed the Coinage Act of 1864 that mandates that the inscription "In God We Trust" be placed on all coins minted as United States currency.
Coincidence?
;D
|
|
|
Post by mohs on Apr 22, 2013 12:32:18 GMT -5
Man is a political animal - Aristotle The earth just happened to be the unfortunate home--mostly
|
|
bushmanbilly
Cave Dweller
Member since October 2008
Posts: 4,719
|
Post by bushmanbilly on Apr 22, 2013 12:36:07 GMT -5
If you live in Arkansas, and your backyard is flooded with toxic tar sands muck that just killed your dog, you want them to stop it.
Geez Helen I don't want to take this off topic. But I've been waiting for someone to bring up a little known fact! Why did the developer build a subdivision over a pipeline route? The line was there before the houses. Only a few news orgs reported this. Why? Because it does not fit the green agenda. Thats why. City planners have a brain fart or just got paid off.
About as smart as building on a river bank or beach. One day the river or ocean will flood.
|
|
|
Post by helens on Apr 22, 2013 12:42:34 GMT -5
"The Green Agenda"? Another big label? You think people in Washington care what local zoning and building does in Arkansas? You think I care? Do you care?
There are the homes, they are drowning in toxic oil sands, and you are blaming 'greenies' for a builder building homes there? Huh?
It's not the fault of toxic oil sands or the pipe that is pouring millions of gallons out on their homes... it's the builder's fault for putting houses there. It's the 'greenies' fault for pointing out that we don't want that to happen all over the US in everyone's back yards.
Of course it's not the pipeline or the nasty black crud carried in its fault. If we had alternatives, maybe other people won't drown in black crud? Nah. That would be too practical. It's the greenie's fault! YAh!!!
|
|
bushmanbilly
Cave Dweller
Member since October 2008
Posts: 4,719
|
Post by bushmanbilly on Apr 22, 2013 12:58:02 GMT -5
"The Green Agenda"? Another big label? You think people in Washington care what local zoning and building does in Arkansas? You think I care? Do you care?
I guess if they don't care or if you don't care. Why are they or you bitching now? If people cared they would have done some back ground homework on the area before the purchased their homes. Makes about as much sense as building your home beside a heavy traffic dirt road. And then bitching about the dust!
|
|
blarneystone
spending too much on rocks
Rocks in my head
Member since March 2010
Posts: 307
|
Post by blarneystone on Apr 22, 2013 13:25:01 GMT -5
"The Green Agenda"? Another big label? You think people in Washington care what local zoning and building does in Arkansas? You think I care? Do you care? I guess if they don't care or if you don't care. Why are they or you bitching now? If people cared they would have done some back ground homework on the area before the purchased their homes. Makes about as much sense as building your home beside a heavy traffic dirt road. And then bitching about the dust! So... following your logic, everyone on the Gulf Coast should pack it up and move inland? Lots of off shore oil rigs out there just waiting to start leaking. I suppose I should be smarter and move someplace like... say... West, Tx? Comon man... that makes absolutely no sense. The article you posted makes no sense either and fails to make it's case for the cause and effect relationship it claims. Faulty logic with no evidence to back up the claim.
|
|
bushmanbilly
Cave Dweller
Member since October 2008
Posts: 4,719
|
Post by bushmanbilly on Apr 22, 2013 13:42:42 GMT -5
"The Green Agenda"? Another big label? You think people in Washington care what local zoning and building does in Arkansas? You think I care? Do you care? I guess if they don't care or if you don't care. Why are they or you bitching now? If people cared they would have done some back ground homework on the area before the purchased their homes. Makes about as much sense as building your home beside a heavy traffic dirt road. And then bitching about the dust! So... following your logic, everyone on the Gulf Coast should pack it up and move inland? Lots of off shore oil rigs out there just waiting to start leaking. I suppose I should be smarter and move someplace like... say... West, Tx? Comon man... that makes absolutely no sense. The article you posted makes no sense either and fails to make it's case for the cause and effect relationship it claims. Faulty logic with no evidence to back up the claim. No thats not my logic, its the greens. Glad you brought that subject up. Why is it that the greenies want to protect the rural areas when they say nothing about big cities expanding? How many forests were clear cut to build New York or the eastern seaboard? How many animals were left homeless or extinct? As for the article, I didn't write it. But you may have missed this part. And yet, the environmentalists will not declare victory. Instead, they have invented the myth of anthropogenic global warming. Property owners have discovered that their compromises with the environmentalists did not solve anything. Their agenda will never end, until western civilization is destroyed and we return to the Stone Age. It is because the environmentalists’ insane agenda is so clear, and has so far been so successful, that other activists, like supporters of abortion rights and the right to bear arms, know they must employ knee-jerk reflexive opposition to any and all proposals of their opponents.
|
|
grayfingers
Cave Dweller
Member since November 2007
Posts: 4,575
|
Post by grayfingers on Apr 22, 2013 13:47:12 GMT -5
April 22nd is also the day that U.S. Congress passed the Coinage Act of 1864 that mandates that the inscription "In God We Trust" be placed on all coins minted as United States currency. Coincidence? ;D Also born today . . . 1904 J. Robert Oppenheimer April 22, 1954 The Senate Army-McCarthy hearings begin. They are broadcast on television. April 22, 1994 Richard M. Nixon died of a stroke at the age of 81. Spooky. . . perhaps there is order and balance in the universe after all. :cheesy:
|
|
blarneystone
spending too much on rocks
Rocks in my head
Member since March 2010
Posts: 307
|
Post by blarneystone on Apr 22, 2013 13:58:33 GMT -5
You didn't say?: "If people cared they would have done some back ground homework on the area before the purchased their homes. Makes about as much sense as building your home beside a heavy traffic dirt road. And then bitching about the dust!"
That's the part that makes no sense. It's like saying that the folks in West, Tx. deserved to have their homes destroyed because they were stupid enough to build their homes next to a fertilizer factory.... Is that what you meant to say?
|
|
blarneystone
spending too much on rocks
Rocks in my head
Member since March 2010
Posts: 307
|
Post by blarneystone on Apr 22, 2013 14:03:17 GMT -5
I didn't miss the point.
The article claims a cause and effect relationship where there is none.
|
|
bushmanbilly
Cave Dweller
Member since October 2008
Posts: 4,719
|
Post by bushmanbilly on Apr 22, 2013 14:41:24 GMT -5
You didn't say?: "If people cared they would have done some back ground homework on the area before the purchased their homes. Makes about as much sense as building your home beside a heavy traffic dirt road. And then bitching about the dust!" That's the part that makes no sense. It's like saying that the folks in West, Tx. deserved to have their homes destroyed because they were stupid enough to build their homes next to a fertilizer factory.... Is that what you meant to say? I know I'm going to get slammed for the following, but oh well tiss life. Do people not look around the neighborhood before they buy. I know that if I as buying a new home and seen this in the back alley. I would ask some questions. As for W-Texas. In some sad ways it is there fault. Murphy's law is not a joke. As with everything a person does in life. You have to weigh the risks with the reward. People choose where they want to live. Few people look into what the hazards are until its too late. To many people have tunnel vision. When I go to work. Before I enter a location. Even if I was there the day before. I have to stop and do a risk evaluation assessment. I have to list the possible hazards before I enter. Anything from a simple trip hazard to a life threatening explosive hazard. And if I feel its unsafe, I don't go in.
|
|
blarneystone
spending too much on rocks
Rocks in my head
Member since March 2010
Posts: 307
|
Post by blarneystone on Apr 22, 2013 16:31:35 GMT -5
So... my personal assesment is that there are very few places on the planet where one can be safely out of reach from potential man-made hazards. Should I move? Or should tge hazards be mitigated?
|
|
bushmanbilly
Cave Dweller
Member since October 2008
Posts: 4,719
|
Post by bushmanbilly on Apr 22, 2013 18:20:05 GMT -5
So... my personal assesment is that there are very few places on the planet where one can be safely out of reach from potential man-made hazards. Should I move? Or should tge hazards be mitigated? If you live in high populated areas, not so much. Hazards are a part of life, business and trade. If proper rules and regs are in place. The chances of a disaster will be low. One that should be in place is pipeline age limits. A 60 year old pipe should have been decommissioned 10 years ago. I do believe Exxon is at fault and should pay accordingly. But I do believe the city planner and the developer should shoulder some to.
|
|
|
Post by Rockoonz on Apr 22, 2013 20:09:53 GMT -5
Personally I prefer to celebrate Holly Maddux Day.
More and more Americans are opting out of Earth Day in favor of a holiday which offers a chance to fight back against Marxism and political correctness. The holiday, which is called “Holly Maddux Day,” is named after the young woman murdered by Ira Einhorn, a 1960s antiwar activist. Einhorn, who was a friend of Jerry Rubin and Abby Hoffman, is regarded by many as the founder of Earth Day. Einhorn emceed the first Earth Day celebration in Philadelphia in April 1970, at which Senator Edmund Muskie gave the highlight address. Einhorn, an advocate of free love and drug use, was instrumental in gaining the support of corporate America for Earth Day. Einhorn bludgeoned Maddux to death in 1979, leaving her body to decompose in the same apartment where he entertained guests. After his arrest, Einhorn was defended by the liberal Republican senator, Arlen Spector. Einhorn fled to France, and after being extradited in 2002, was convicted of first-degree murder in the death of HollyMaddux. Holly Maddux Day is celebrated each year to commemorate the loss of Holly Maddux and to reflect on the suffering of all those who met with persecution or martyrdom at the hands of totalitarian Marxist governments. Holly Maddux Day commemorates the 13 Catholic bishops and 4,000 priests and seminarians killed in the Spanish Civil War; the 30 million killed in the Soviet Union under Joseph Stalin; and the 100 million slain in China under Mao Tsetung. The day also commemorates those individuals slain by the Left, including among many others, those executed in the French Revolution, Louis XVI, the Queen of France, and the heir to the French throne; those killed by the Bolsheviks in the Russian Revolution, including Czar Alexander II, Czarina Alexandra, and their five children; and those who were slain by anarchist or Communist assassins, including Empress Elizabeth of Bavaria; President William McKinley, and President John Fitzgerald Kennedy. Holly Maddux Day is observed by wearing white and sending lighted baskets down streams and rivers in memory of those who were killed for the sake of the truth. The symbol of Holly Maddux Day is a holly leaf within a golden circle. A sprig of holly may also be worn on an item of white clothing to mark the day.
|
|
Sabre52
Cave Dweller
Me and my gal, Rosie
Member since August 2005
Posts: 20,487
|
Post by Sabre52 on Apr 22, 2013 22:30:42 GMT -5
Blarney: Was in my jeep listening to the news right after the West, Texas explosion and city representatives themselves were bemoaning the fact that previous folks in power had allowed all three schools and a bunch of homes to be built right across the tracks from a fertilizer factory. Seems really stupid right? The hazard could be mitigated all right, by not building homes and schools by a plant manufacturing explosive stuff or next to an oil pipeline. I don't know that man can build anything that is totally safe so can we mitigate all man made hazards? I think not. So lets face it, no one "deserves" to have their homes or school blown up or gooed by oil but would you be stupid enough to buy a home next to a factory that makes explosive stuff or an oil pipeline. I would not. There are potential prices to be paid for stupidity and making bad choices. The dirt road example makes perfect sense. You move into a situation where there is risk of dust from the dirt road. You saw the road before you moved there. You ain't an innocent where blame is concerned.
It does pay to do some research about where you buy a home or build a school and not doing such research, while it does not make you totally culpable, does make you partially culpable and less than brilliant. I used to work in Oxnard district in southern California. Used to get calls to got down to homes on the beach. Built on stilts with the surf going right up under them. Once and awhile storms would wash them away. All the Ventura County beaches have oil rigs off shore of them. People that buy on the beach know there is the chance of a spill or well blowout. They know there is some risk before buying, and they still buy. Not their fault if a well blows and oils the beach or if a storm destroys their beach house. However, it is to some extent, their fault for buying there because they bought knowing there was risk in doing so. That's why insurance companies have departments that assess risk and assign higher rates for things like beach homes....Mel
|
|
|
Post by jakesrocks on Apr 22, 2013 23:30:53 GMT -5
Sounds like us in S.D. Mel. They wanted to tax the farmers for the dust created when they drove their farm equipment down the dirt roads. Seems the rich folks decided it would be nice to build their million dollar houses out in the boonies. Now they're crying about the dust. They live on gravel roads for crap sakes. If they're stupid enough to build their fancy homes out here, let them suffer the dust just like the rest of us.
|
|
blarneystone
spending too much on rocks
Rocks in my head
Member since March 2010
Posts: 307
|
Post by blarneystone on Apr 23, 2013 9:47:46 GMT -5
Mel... I understand that there are always risks and most can't be mitigated. Natural events like storms, EQs, tidal waves, etc... for the most part can't be predicted or controlled. However, man-made risk can be mitigated and controlled. People who live in close proximity to hazards, both man-made and natural, are generally low income and can only afford to live in those areas. Look at what happened in New Orleans when Katrina hit. Those affected were mostly low income because the housing in the low lying areas was cheap. Of course, the knee jerk reaction to the situation is simply to tell them; ‘get up, pack up and move somewhere that the hazards aren’t so great.’ As humans, we have that choice but aren’t you forgetting that we share this planet with other creatures as well? As I said earlier, I don’t think there are many places on the planet where man-made risk can be avoided. Are all the people on the West coast idiots because they built their homes and businesses downwind from a huge nuclear disaster that is still uncontrolled? Are they responsible to their children who may already be rendered sterile due to exposure? Or worse, doomed to die from cancer later in life? I can think of so many places where living with man-made hazards is unavoidable but have a difficult time coming up with a place to live where man-made hazards are not immediate. Your comments sometimes leave me scratching my head because your vision can be so narrow. I would think that you, as a biologist would consider not only the impact of hazards upon humans but animals as well. The article posted in the OP basically states that the tactics used by environmentalists has changed the way special interest groups operate; that they are now forced to use those very same tactics. The article fails to mention that big money interests are mostly responsible for the dirty tactics employed. Yes, environmentalists are determined and steadfast. They are passionate about their cause. I’m not talking about politicians seeking monetary gain from regulating industry. I’m talking about the conservationists, biologists (most of them) and naturalists who merely want a cleaner, less hazardous planet to live on. Attacking environmentalists as a whole serves no purpose. Environmentalists have done so much more good than harm. In countries where there are no environmentalists, the evidence is all around. Just look at China where big business rules and the rivers, lakes and air are filthy. Bushmanbilly actually made my point in his response earlier: Who do you think proposes those regulations? Business interests?
|
|
bushmanbilly
Cave Dweller
Member since October 2008
Posts: 4,719
|
Post by bushmanbilly on Apr 23, 2013 11:09:16 GMT -5
|
|