Progressives Increasingly Comparing Global Warming to Slavery
On Earth Day, liberal MSNBC host Chris Hayes published a piece for The Nation which compared the political economy of global warming to the political economy of slavery. Hayes compared the financial interests of preserving slavery to the financial interests of burning hydrocarbons which environmentalists say cause global warming.
“The last time in American history that some powerful set of interests relinquished its claim on $10 trillion of wealth was in 1865 — and then only after four years and more than 600,000 lives lost in the bloodiest, most horrific war we’ve ever fought,” Hayes said, adding he is not trying to morally equate global warming and slavery.
But while Hayes says he disavows moral equivalency, he argues that the only historical equivalent to the politics of global warming is slavery. Hayes writes that “you must confront the fact that the climate justice movement is demanding that an existing set of political and economic interests be forced to say goodbye to trillions of dollars of wealth.”
“It is impossible to point to any precedent other than abolition,” he adds.
Hayes, however, is not the first person to compare global warming to slavery. Another prominent liberal in the state of Colorado said: “You know, slavery had a lot of economic benefits, but it had an ethical problem.” (RELATED: Fracking opponent compares oil and gas practices to slavery)
That liberal was Weston Wilson, an environmental engineer and former environmental regulator who appeared in the anti-fracking film “Gasland.” Wilson made his comments at Colorado Christian University on Monday night, reports Complete Colorado.
“Burning fossil fuels is an ethical problem. You can’t put under the seas Bangladesh or Micronesia because of our collective burning of fossil fuels. That’s what’s happening,” Wilson said.
Wilson was on a panel debating hydraulic fracturing, or fracking, in Colorado — a contentious issue in the state, where environmentalists are trying to ban the drilling practice. Wilson’s comments were immediately criticized by another panelist who called them “outrageous.”
Not long before Hayes and Wilson, the liberal blog Grist put out a piece titled “Is climate change the new slavery?” The piece argues that global warming will cause massive crop failures and exacerbate world hunger problems, which will drive people to sell themselves into slavery.
Read more with live links at Freedom Outpost.
Senator Harry Reid calls Bundy protestors domestic terrorists. But what act of terrorism did they commit? Meanwhile, the President’s adviser on Homeland Security says that families and communities can recognize homegrown terrorism by looking out for a “confrontational child”. Is that the definition of domestic terrorism, confrontation? Turns out, if you look at what happened in Nevada, the answer may be, yes.
Another reason federal judges should be disbanded or allowed only to act on anything FEDERAL.
Fed. Judge Rules Ohio Must Follow Other States’ Marriage Laws Instead of Its Own
So long, Ohio. According to a federal judge Monday in Henry v. Himes, the U.S. Constitution now requires that the laws of one state automatically supersede those of Ohio, whether or not Ohio approves.
The circumstances surround same-sex marriage, though the precise legal issue is one that has been flying below the radar for some time – the recognition by one state of another state’s same-sex marriage. In the case, several same-sex couples with marriage licenses from California, Massachusetts, and New York sought recognition of their relationships in their home state of Ohio, where marriage is defined as between only one man and one woman. According to Monday’s ruling, Ohio’s marriage laws are “facially unconstitutional and unenforceable under any circumstances.” Thus, same-sex marriage licenses from any jurisdiction are valid in Ohio.
While the court said that Ohio is not required to issue its own marriage licenses to same-sex couples, this reservation amounts to a distinction without a difference. If same-sex couples can cross the state line, get a same-sex marriage, and then demand full recognition of their relationship upon returning home, it makes little difference whether Ohio issues licenses itself.
But is this result really required by the U.S. Constitution?
When the Supreme Court struck down DOMA last summer in the Windsorcase, it struck down only the federal definition of marriage, leaving in place the sovereignty of the several states. Federal law still affirms that “[n]o State… shall be required to give effect to any public act, record, or judicial proceeding of any other State… respecting a relationship between persons of the same sex.” In other words, if your state doesn’t have same-sex marriage, your state doesn’t have to recognize same-sex marriages from other states. Yet, in this ruling that Ohio must recognize same-sex marriages from other states, the court determined that this directly-applicable provision of federal law is somehow “not specifically before the Court.”
Read the full article at Breitbart.com.
Diagnosing David Gregory: Meet the Jerk
Diagnosing David Gregory: NBC’s Cognitive Dissonant Hack Syndrome
by Michelle Malkin
I’ve always thought entrenched left-wing journalists in Washington needed their heads examined. Much to my satisfaction, it appears the corporate media bosses of at least one Beltway anchor now agree.
According to The Washington Post this week, NBC News hired a “psychological consultant” to examine why flailing “Meet the Press” moderator David Gregory has been bombing in the ratings. The overpriced shrinks (NBC prefers the euphemism “brand consultants”) came from the New York-based brand fixer-upper Elastic Strategy.
They interviewed Gregory’s wife. They interrogated his friends. They crunched their numbers. They compiled their reports. And after all that, the “experts” are still scratching their noggins:
What’s the matter with David Gregory? And why don’t people like to watch him?
I could have saved the honchos at NBC News a lot of time and trouble. The first answer is: David Gregory is a phony. The second answer is: He’s a jerk.
And no amount of brand therapy and rehabilitation consulting can fix him.
Read it all HERE.
Judge rules SSM opponents have no rights
A federal judge has dismissed a lawsuit filed against Gallaudet University by the school’s diversity officer, who the college demoted after she signed an anti-gay marriage petition.
The dismissal effectively confirms the worries of gay marriage opponents, who say that releasing the names on ballot petitions leaves signatories vulnerable to retaliation.
Some states have provisions that prohibit discrimination against ballot signatories, but the District of Columbia — home to Gallaudet University — provides protection only for D.C. ballot measures.
The acclaimed school for the deaf suspended and then demoted Angela McCaskill after a lesbian professor discovered her name on the petition to put “Proposition 6” — which would have overturned Maryland’s legalization of gay marriage — on the November 2012 Maryland ballot.
Read the full article at The Daily Caller.
To me, this is great! The gays okay with outing straights, but not gays? Hahahhahaha
U.S. “switched sides in the war on terror,” allowed $500 million of weapons to reach al-Qaeda jihadists
It’s really no wonder that things have fallen out the way they have. When there is an administration in Washington that has essentially “switched sides” and is aiding the jihadis who murdered 3,000 Americans on 9/11, and the mainstream media is avid to protect that administration from the slightest hint of adverse publicity, it is no surprise that those who speak clearly about the jihad terror threat are demonized and smeared, and shunned by the clueless and cowardly. The entire world is upside down, and there is no one in any position of significant power or influence who is standing against the West’s headlong rush to suicide.
“Benghazi attack could have been prevented if US hadn’t ‘switched sides in the War on Terror’ and allowed $500 MILLION of weapons to reach al-Qaeda militants, reveals damning report,” by David Martosko, Daily Mail, April 22:
Pre-Crime Systems Now Actively Monitoring the Internet: “The Computer Algorithm Learns the Pattern and Produces a Prediction”
With revelations that the National Security Agency has collected some 20 trillion phone calls and emails via an expansive nationwide surveillance network, most Americans have already come to the realization that everything they do is being monitored.
But many shrug off Big Brother’s prying eyes by suggesting that, since they aren’t doing anything wrong, they have nothing to worry about.
That may have been true several years ago, but the digital surveillance systems of today are far more advanced than most people understand. No longer are these machines simply recording the data and storing them in some historical archive to be pulled at a later date should the government ever have reason to take a closer look at your personal life.
The next generation of systems are being used to actively monitor your digital interactions, surfing habits, conversations and daily sentiment in an effort to predict your future behavior. Nowhere is this more apparent than in the systems currently operating within the social media sphere.
Researchers at the University of Virginia funded by the U.S. Army recently demonstrated that they can not only gather information from your personal Twitter account just like the NSA, but also aggregate and analyze that information with advanced predictive algorithms designed to determine what you’re going to do next. In this case, the researches focused specifically on predicting crime by individuals, as well as in crime “hot spots” around the country.
Here’s the kicker. The algorithms being used don’t just look for obvious keyword phrases associated with criminal activity like “I’m going to kill you” or “meet me later and we’ll give him a beat down,” but focus in on routine activities, geo-location, and aggregate historical information to calculate the chance of a particular individual being involved in a crime at some point in the future.
Meet The Militia Rushing To Cliven Bundy’s Defense
James Yeager is calling from Cliven Bundy’s front yard, where he’s one of several (he won’t say how many) providing 24-hour security to the Bundy family. He and his friend packed up “a full medical kit and a camera” and drove 26 ½ hours from their home in Camden, Tennessee last week to document what he calls “a tremendous overreach of federal power.” He’s been posting daily videos to his YouTube site.
When asked if he also packed weapons, Yeager said, “of course. I’m always armed. This is not any different than any other day for me.”
Yeager is one of hundreds of supporters who journeyed to Bunkerville, Nevada in support of the rancher’s standoff with the federal Bureau of Land Management. Though federal agents released Bundy’s cattle over a week ago, many have remained on the ranch to protest and protect the rancher’s family. They’ve hailed Bundy — who owes the federal government over $1 million in unpaid grazing fees — as an “American hero.” The Mormon father of 14 has even inspired futuristic fan fiction from his most ardent admirers: “Yes, it’s been a great half-century for America, and we owe much of our good fortune to the bravery of Cliven Bundy.”
They call themselves militia members, oath keepers, protesters and patriots. Senator Harry Reid calls them “domestic terrorists.”
So which is it? In the background of the Bundy debate over federal land is a battle over image: protesters who want to paint themselves as American citizens defending the Constitution against a tyrannical government, versus groups worried about the extremist anti-government militia members among them, who may be more and more willing to take up arms in the fight for “freedom.”
Read on HERE.
Offensive gun porn to all liberals…..