Tag Archives: climate change


Or to put it in simple terms, democracy, Christianity, and the information super highway.

In an article dated June 7, 2014 in psychologytoday.com, entitled “The Cult of Ignorance in the United States: Anti-Intellectualism and the ‘dumbing down’ of America,” author Ray Williams indicates that there is a growing and disturbing trend of anti-intellectual elitism in American culture. It’s dismissal of science, the arts, and humanities and their replacement by entertainment, self-righteousness, ignorance, and deliberate gullibility.

Not so sure that I understand the complete meaning of all that was said above, but I’ll forge on anyway.

Mr. Williams gives examples of how the United States of America is being “dumbed down,” and indicates that part of the reason for rising anti-intellectual elitism can be found in the declining state of education in the U.S.  as compared to other advanced countries.  One such example is from the Oklahoma Council of Public Affairs, through a commissioned civic education poll among public school students: 77% of public school students didn’t know that George Washington was the first President of the United States, and couldn’t name Thomas Jefferson as the author of the Declaration of Independence. Furthermore, only 2.8 of the students could actually pass an American citizenship test. Other examples include that 18% of Americans believe that the sun revolves around the earth (according to a Gallup poll), 68% of public school children in the United States do not read proficiently by the time they finish third grade (2009 Assessment of Educational Progress), and barely 50% of students are ready for college level reading when they graduate (U.S. News & World Report).

You can review this list by going to The Cult of Ignorance in the United States: Anti-Intellectualism and the dumbing down of America.

Mr. Williams also cites another Gallup poll indicating that 42% of Americans still believe that God created human beings in their present form less than 10,000 years ago, and that 25% of public school biology teachers believe that humans and dinosaurs inhabited the earth simultaneously. Thus our Christian beliefs, including that the Bible is the immutable word of God have contributed to the “dumbing down” of America. Well, Mr. Williams, I have something to tell you: God was “taken out of our society” in 1963 following two landmark decisions, Engel v. Vitale (1962) and Abington School District v. Schempp (1963) where the Supreme Court established what is now the current prohibition on state-sponsored prayer in U.S. schools. From my observations, it seems as most of the so-called “dumbing down” of America took place afterwards. In fact, it was churches in early America that established the first schools.

The article, without a doubt besmirches social media. Mr. Williams points to Bill Keller, a writer for the New York Times, who has indicated that anti-intellectual elitism is not an elitism of wisdom, education, experience or knowledge. The new elite are the angry social media posters, those who can shout loudest and more often, a clique of bullies and malcontents baying together like dogs cornering a fox. Too often it’s a combined elite of the anti-intellectuals and the conspiracy followers, not those who can voice the most cogent, most coherent response. Together they foment a rabid culture of anti-rationalism where every fact is suspect, every shadow holds a secret conspiracy. Rational thought is the enemy. Critical thinking is the devil’s tool. Herd mentality takes over online, the anti-intellectuals become the metaphorical equivalent of an angry lunch mob when anyone either challenges of the mob beliefs or posts anything outside the mob’s self-limiting set of values.

This kind of reminds me of liberals on social media. Get on a liberal thread and post an opinion different from the other posters, and you’re pounced upon, like Mr. Keller says, dogs cornering a fox.

At an early point in the article, Mr. Williams cites Pulitzer Prize winner, Richard Hofstadter, in his 1964 book, Anti-Intellectualism in American Life, describes how the vast underlying foundations of anti-elite, anti-reason, and anti-science have been infused into America’s political and social fabric.

Of course, when “anti-science” is mentioned, we conservatives almost always think about climate change. And while there are experts out there who indicate climate change is a hoax and thus, a means by which the government can more and more control over our lives, we’re demonized, sometimes to the point of being called “flat earthers” when we question the existence of climate change.

Mr. Williams’ article also quotes science fiction writer, Isaac Asimov, who once said: “There is a cult of ignorance in the United States of American, and there has always been. The strain of anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that my ignorance is just as good as your knowledge.”

So, is democracy under attack here? My first question is what makes a science fiction writer an expert on American culture and democracy? It sure looks like our system of government is under attack. One of the tenants of democracy is freedom of speech and freedom of expression. We’re free to talk and express ourselves, no matter how ignorant we may appear. Sure looks to me like he’s attacking democracy by indicating that because of our ignorance, we shouldn’t have the right to question experts/those who know best.

With the advent of the Internet and subsequently one of its components, social media, people have access to the world’s knowledge at their fingertips. They also have access to the world’s garbage. We no longer have to pick up the newspaper out of the yard or time our lives by the television to get the news of the day. Instead, we grab or phones, tablets, or laptops and log on to our favorite news sites. And let’s not forget we can turn on our TVs to the various 24-hour news channels. In other words, we don’t have to wait on newspapers, news magazines, or the evening/morning network news broadcasts to know what’s taking place.

Furthermore, if there’s a subject about which we wish to learn more, we don’t have to wait until the library opens, get cleaned up and presentable, and drive to the local branch to see what information the facility may have on our topic, we get on our phone, tablet, or PC.

Because we can absorb more information in less time, from a plethora of sources, we can also form opinions and ask questions.

Through the newer mechanism of social media, we can more readily interact with those who are of like mind or those who are not of like mind. Of course, with the good, always comes the bad. We often make asses of ourselves, and we also can make asses of others.

Mr. Williams, in my interpretation of his article, tells us that the United States is an ignorant nation and is getting even more ignorant. This is because of our Christian faith, the way we govern ourselves, and our immediate access to all the world’s knowledge. It’s made us bold, it’s made us curious, it’s made us question those who put themselves forth as experts.

I agree with Mr. Williams that this country is “dumbing down” or as he would say we are becoming victims of anti-intellectualism. But it’s not because of our Christian/Judeo culture, nor is it because we are a democracy where freedom speech and freedom of expression are not quashed. And lastly, it’s not because of the Internet and subsequently social media.

It’s because we did take God out of our society in the sixties and are still doing it today. Liberalism in its utopic desire to not just guarantee everyone equal opportunity, but to insist that outcomes also be equal has led to the diminishing of competition to determine who is best, replacing competition with a one-size fits all participation trophies.

In our public schools, we seem to hesitate to delineate gifted students who should be recognized and placed on a track to learning that doesn’t allow them to become lackadaisical, losing interest and prone to fill their down time with unhealthy activities. Doing this might affect the self-esteem of the other students and perhaps discourage a potentially gifted student from giving it his or her all.

Teachers’ unions get crazy when anyone outside of academia dares to indicated that their one-size fits all concept of education might be obsolete and various mechanisms such as a school voucher might enhance the educational opportunities of millions of students across the nation.

This country was founded slightly less than 250 years ago, and it is an experiment unlike anything that has ever been tried before. Mr. Williams doesn’t seem to like this experimental nation and feels that freedom of speech and expression, Christian values, and increased access to knowledge continue to make this an ignorant nation. I don’t agree. It’s liberalism.



A meme from “Go Left” appeared on my Facebook news feed stating the following: “People yell that President Obama has divided America. But Obama didn’t divide our country, their unwarranted hatred of him did. Electing him was like turning on a light in a dark room and exposing the cockroaches.”


There are differences of opinion on how we should govern ourselves because our founding fathers set up our nation that way. Because of the way this nation was set up, we have the right to voice our opinions without fear of government reprisal.

There’s not one issue with which I agree with Barak Obama, and I have the right to say that. Since Obama has been in office, he has “trashed” Republicans repeatedly. Plus in the first term of his presidency, he called upon folks to listen for any comments that disparaged his policies and agenda. This is in contrast to former President George W. Bush, who, many times indicated that Americans had the right to disagree with him. President Bush even met with parents, spouses, and other family members of those military personnel who were deployed to Iraq and Afghanistan, but were against the wars.

Barak Obama was elected to the presidency to be the president of all Americans, not just Democrats, not just blacks and other minorities. Instead of being the president of the United States, Barak Obama didn’t waste any time in interjecting himself into a local level dust-up in which he had no business becoming involved. This incident involved Professor Louis Gates, Jr., a black professor, who was returning to his Cambridge, Massachusetts home after a trip to China. Finding the door to his house jammed, he was trying to open it when he was arrested by police Sargent James Crowley. Sargent Crowley was responding to a 911 call in which the caller reported there were men breaking and entering Gates’ residence. Gates was never charged.

On July 22, 2009, six days after the incident, Barak Obama said the following: “I don’t know, not having been there and not seeing all the facts, what role race played in that…the police acted stupidly…there is a history in this country of African Americans and Latinos being stopped by law enforcement disproportionately.” Subsequently a “beer summit” was held at the White House where Professor Gates and Officer Crowley were treated to beers with Obama.

Again, this was something in which the current president should have never involved himself. It was a low-level local matter. If the local NAACP wanted to get involved, that would probably be okay, but the incident was nothing close to the level where the leader of the free world should be putting his priorities, including protecting the people of this country, aside to become involved in a local dust-up.

The cases of Treyvon Martin and Michael Brown were also local level incidents where the president had no business interjecting himself into, much less sending a representative to the funeral of Michael Brown, a thug who, before he was shot, robbed a convenience store and then while being apprehended, tried to take Police Officer Darren Wilson’s gun away. Subsequently, representatives of the “Black Lives Matter” movement, which arose out of the Michael Brown shooting, was predicated on a lie, and currently advocates the killing of law enforcement officers and the destruction of property, were invited to the White House.

Not only has this president sought to divide this country along racial lines, he has sought to divide us along socio-economic lines. He has constantly harped that the rich don’t pay enough in taxes and has told low and middle income individuals that the rich are evil and anyone who is rich somehow became that through nefarious actions. He has further indicated that the rich, particularly the rich Republicans hate the poor and want them to suffer when, in reality, it is the other way around. Because no one ever got rich receiving entitlements such as food stamps and welfare from the government, we want as many folks as possible to be off these programs so they can prosper.

The president and his henchmen have also led lower and middle income individuals to believe that the Republicans don’t care about the environment by constantly preaching the doctrine of man-made climate change. This administration and its followers have also indicated that Republicans want dirty air, dirty water, and to throw Grandma off the cliff (a phrase often used by conservative commentator, Sean Hannity). In the liberals’ quest to gain as much control over our lives as they possibly can, they have demonized fossil fuels and fracking, an innovative way to safely and efficiently extract oil natural gas from beneath the earth’s surface. Fracking was developed by the private sector oil companies…the government had nothing to do with it, except for trying to shut the process down. Because of this innovation, energy prices have decreased, giving low income and middle income individuals some much needed relief.

Of course, the liberals would have you believe that they are champions of lower and middle class individuals and that the Republicans only champion the rich. Well, the “tolerant” left won’t even acknowledge that there is information available that refutes man-made climate change. They are so anxious to cram that theory down our throats and to preach to the American people that unless we immediately get off fossil fuels and go to green energy, we’re doomed. But as President Obama indicated, the price of energy will necessarily rise. The president wants energy costs to rise so we’ll use less of it. If this president and the liberals were really champions of the poor and the middle class, they would be anxious for any discovery out there which would delineate the climate change theory.

Thus, we’re just as divided along socio-economic lines as racial lines.

And let’s not forget religious lines. Even though this president claims to be a Christian, he never misses a change to disparage Christianity. However, when it comes to Islam, he constantly advises the American people to not judge the nation or religion of Islam based on the actions of a few. Of course, after Dylan Roof, the shooter of black church members in Charleston, was seen in a picture on social media with a Confederate battle flag, anyone who so much as owns a Confederate flag belt buckle was labeled a racist, a white supremacist, etc. The president has also referred to Christians and gun owners as “clinging to their guns and their Bibles.”

I don’t see how anyone in their right mind, could say that hatred for Barak Obama divided this country. It was Obama, his administration and liberals at all levels who have divided this country, not the unwarranted hatred of him as the “tolerant” left would have you believe.



My liberal Democrat friends all want to know what I think of Donald Trump. Will I be supporting him whole-heartedly, will I hold my nose and connect the arrows by his name on Election Day, will I stay home, or will I actually do something I’ve never done in my life and vote for the Democrat candidate for president? I actually had a friend who is clueless when it comes to politics and current events ask me sincerely if I was supporting Hillary. Again, this lady is clueless.

In order to find out where I stand on Donald Trump, all friends, not just Democrat friends are going to have to read this post.

Here goes. I have some major problems with Donald Trump. While he’s one of the best business men on the planet, he has no public sector experience. I think you need both in order to serve as president. To say that the public sector and the private sector march to the beat of a different drum is putting it mildly. When Donald Trump wants something done, it gets done just because he orders in done. This is true with private business. Private business is not a democracy. Those of us who have spent decades working in the private sector know that when our boss tells us to do something, we had better do it or risk getting fired for insubordination. If you work in the private sector, you can be “called in” and fired for no reason. This doesn’t happen often. In fact, I only know of one instance where this happened. Of course, there was an underlying reason, but it was one that department management didn’t want in the records. In governing, especially being president of the United States, it just doesn’t work that way. Donald Trump as president is not going to have the same power as Donald Trump CEO had. How is he going to deal with it? Will he do what Obama has done? “I’ve got a pen and I’ve got a phone and I’m going to use them when Congress doesn’t give me what I want.” While the Obama zombies and the mainstream media allowed Obama to get by with this statement and even applauded him, the mainstream media and left will never let a Republican president get by with this. Having said the above, I would have had the same problem with outsiders Karly Fiorina and Dr. Ben Carson.

In a Republican nominee for president, I wanted someone who would first and foremost take steps to repeal Obamacare, the most insidious thing every wrought upon the American public by the American government. Then I wanted the Republican nominee to indicate that he or she would go through and “uncheck” all of the executive orders that Barak Obama signed, thereby going outside of Congress to make law.

Candidate Trump has been accused of flip-flopping on many things including universal health care. After reviewing his statements on healthcare from the website on the issues.org, I’m getting mixed signals. Initially, he was for universal healthcare and indicated that he was liberal when it comes to healthcare. Now, he’s indicating that Obamacare is a complete disaster and should be repealed in its entirety. Trump does believe, though, that pre-existing conditions should be covered.

Trump on abortion admits that he was once pro-choice, but is not pro-life. A lot of pro-choice folks have converted to pro-life stances. I have no problem with that what-so-ever.

Soaking the rich is something that Donald Trump has advocated by calling for a 14.25% tax on the net worth of wealthy Americans in order to eliminate the national debt. I’ve never been in favor of soaking the rich. It never works and generally serves to hurt middle and low income individuals.

He also feels that the Department of Education should be abolished so that education can be handled locally. In addition, he thinks the EPA is a disgrace and should be cut, that climate change is a hoax, and that solar energy is a bad investment.

Furthermore, every time I tune into the news, the talking heads are discussing some sort of flip-flop he has made.

However, have you looked at the alternative? If Hillary Clinton is elected president, we can kiss this country good-bye. We simply cannot let her get elected. If she’s elected, we may very well have single payer health care coverage rammed down our throats. She will continue to gut the military and do nothing about ISIS. In addition, she will continue her war on the coal industry putting thousands of workers out of jobs and cause energy prices to rise. Green energy, no matter how unreliable and costly will also be rammed down our throats. Foreign policy will continue to be a joke.

Good Lord willing, I will be at the polling place on Election Day and will probably hold my nose as I vote. For additional information on where Nominee Trump stands on the issues, you can visit this website. Trump on the issues.




The United Nations conference on climate change will take place from November 30, 2015 to December 11, 2015 in Paris, France. Last week the current president of the United States said the following, “What a powerful rebuke to the terrorists it will be, when the world stands as one and shows that we will not be deterred from building a better future for our children.”

I often refer to myself as an unenlightened oaf because I’m one of those southern white conservative Christians who the liberals hate. The only good thing about folks like me is that I’m part of a group that you can make fun of and still maintain your aura of political correctness. I call myself an unenlightened oaf because I don’t often understand liberal logic and the way liberals often try to spin their way out of situations where their backs were against the wall. I’ve often said that I may not be a smart as liberals because liberals had a large percent of academicians in their corner. In other words, most school teachers and college professors fall in line with the left. Of course, I say all of this tongue and cheek.

The gloves are coming off and I’m going to call it like I see it. I began using the sarcastic term, “tolerant left,” to refer to liberals who claim to be so tolerant and understanding of other people’s feelings and views, when in fact liberals are the most racist, bigoted, and intolerant people on the planet. Earlier today, I came up with another phrase that might be useful to describe liberals, “liberal dumb.”

To say that the United Nations conference on climate change, COP21, will have an impact in the war on terrorism, is beyond liberal dumb, its shear lunacy. I can’t imagine even the most delusional Obama zombie could fall for something like this.

According to CNN, world leaders opened pivotal climate talks Monday in Paris, saying the stakes are too high to end the conference without achieving a binding agreement to help slow the pace of global climate change. “A political moment like this may not come again, U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon told leaders gathered for the conference. “We have never faced such a test. But neither have we encountered such great opportunity.”

The current President has said the following, “What greater rejection of those who would tear down our world than marshaling our best efforts to save it.” French President Francois Hollande noted that “never have the stakes been so high because this is about the future of the planet, the future of life.”

It’s time for me to ask a question. How in the world is this climate change conference going to stop the activities of ISIS and other terrorist groups. Even if climate change was real and not a great hoax that politicians are trying to level on us in order to take more control over our lives and eventually create a one world government, it would take time to decide on methods to combat climate change and to implement them. After implementation, wouldn’t it take some time for the effects to be scene? In the meantime, what are ISIS and other terrorist groups going to do? Wait until the climate improves and it’s not so hot where they are? Get jobs and quit their terrorist activities? Of course, the President of the United States thinks that just seeing world leaders make an effort to combat climate change will cause them to change their ways for the better.

Millions of Americans fell for, “If you like your doctor, you can keep your doctor.” They also fell for, “health insurance premiums will decrease approximately $2,500 a year. I can see low information voters falling for this, voters who rarely watch the news and when they do, they get their news from one of the big three main stream media sources. My limited vocabulary does not allow me to describe how looney, delusional, and insane it is to think the COP21 conference will make ISIS and other terrorist groups cease their activities because they will now have hope that the world will become a better place. It’s always been hot in the Middle East and it will always be hot in the Middle East. Besides, if temps were to cool down in the Middle East, the liberals would blame it on climate change which, of course is the fault of George W. Bush, Fox News, and Christians.



According to breitbart.com, the French edition of the Huffington Post went full-Guardian with its response to Friday’s massacre in Paris, insisting there were several undeniable links between these barbaric and fascist acts by radical Islamists and the climate.

Oliver Lane of Breitbart, in an article entitled “Huffpo: Combating Climate Change is the Best Way to fight ISIS,” indicates that mass casualty terror attacks seem to have a strange side effect of sending the leftist Twitterati into a spin, leaving them totally off-note and publishing inappropriate, tone-dear nonsense. Salon was dishing up family size portions of it almost immediately, rushing out a Saturday editorial linking Islamist murder in Paris with the American right and Fox News and #BlackLivesMatter.

The French edition of the Huffington Post, in an article entitled, “A Successful Climate Change Conference is the Best Response to ISIS Brutality,” acknowledges that ISIS has declared war on us all. As a result, the only thing that matters from now on, as a response to terrorism, is a security reinforcement and a re-examination of our priorities. The Huff Post article, written by Corrinne LePage, goes on to indicate that the war that’s been declared on us is also psychological.

The report released by ISIS to claim the massacre in Paris uses all the tools of conditioning and psychological manipulation: a turning of tables, presenting the Islamic State as a victim instead of an assassin, while promising to continue to spread terror, and criticizing policy makers for creating internal divisions, a criticism intended to bring about self-doubt. (I don’t know what this means, so maybe I need to get a liberal to translate for me since I’m nothing but an unenlightened oaf.)

Ms. LePage indicates that our first response to ISIS should be to understand the above psychological tactic, so that we don’t allow them to win. She says we don’t have to be guilt-tripped into fighting these barbaric groups. Our values are strong enough to refuse to sink to their level. Instead, we should turn toward reinforcing national unity against their aggression. LePage believes that enlightenment and democratic progress are strong enough to stand up to such behavior, which is sending us back to pre-historic times.

Ms. LePage believes that the climate change issue will determine, in the long term, the survival of mankind, and in the short term, the demographic balance. She also believes that there are definitely several undeniable links between these barbaric and fascist acts by radical Islamists and the climate.

Because ISIS lives off of the smuggling and trafficking all kinds of goods, but in particular, on aid coming from oil-rich countries and oil smuggling, reducing the locations of oil and hydrocarbons, developing energy autonomy of each country through renewable energy, and fighting the omnipotence of oil producers will all help to reduce the power of ISIS. LePage believes that the consequences of climate change are forming the conditions of terrorism; mass migration tied to poor weather has destabilized a number of areas around the world, inevitable transforming them into zones of conflict. She further believes that postponing the COP21 conference would not be a wise thing to do because that would give ISIS the impression that they had won.

This woman also goes on to say that the behavior of countries in the North is sometimes questionable, and that democracy may not have been fully achieved. But that does not mean that humanism and democracy are not the best systems that humanity could have invented to protect and defend us. LePage ends the article indicating that the COP 21 conference will surely take place and she hopes that it will be a great success, as well as a huge slap in the face for the ISIS butchers.

Some liberals are blaming Fox News and conservative Americans for the Paris attacks. What else is new? Ms. LePage of the French Huffington Post is saying climate change is responsible for the terrorist attacks and the sooner we get off of fossil fuels, ISIS will be weakened.

Has anybody forgot the State Department Spokesperson (Marie Harf or Jen Psaki) who said that we needed to provide the terrorists with jobs, so they will quit doing bad things?

Let’s get off of fossil fuels and make the transition to green energy as soon as possible. And while we’re doing that, let’s get the terrorists jobs. The COP 21 conference needs to be re-scheduled as soon as possible. Originally, Al Gore was supposed to speak from atop of the Eiffel Tower, but that has been cancelled. And it’s too bad because that would have been so moving.

In closing, “Hip, Hip, Hooray,” we have a solution to weakening and eventually destroying ISIS: Attack climate change with vigor, transition to fossil fuels, and get the terrorists jobs.