If We, At Politisite, Wanted A Free And Constitutional America To Fail ...

A central understanding of why nations fail has found that political institutions and the behavior of ruling elites largely determine the economic success or failure of the countries they operate in. If most Americans have experienced virtually no economic gains for decades, perhaps we should cast our gaze on the Constitutional and political factors in/or out of effect throughout our own society. Image Credit: investorcentric

If We, At Politisite, Wanted A Free And Constitutional America To Fail ...

Today on the Rush Limbaugh radio program, Rush mentioned and played a few snippets of a video produced and posted by FreeMarketAmerica.org. The presentation gave light to the how and why America appears to be going backward and failing on the goals and opportunity that had once been hallmarks to a free and Constitutional America.

Ryan Houck, the Executive Director of FreeMarketAmerica.org, a project of Americans for Limited Government, produced this opinion presentation which was inspired by Paul Harvey’s “If I were the Devil” published in 1964 and 1996.

Paul Harvey was a cultural and news story commentator that became one of the first to reach millions of people with his presentations. He used the medium of radio in the form of a 15 minute syndicated show that generally aired around noon and The Paul Harvey Show helped to stitch part of the fabric of a true American culture or insight on a way to think or view the world around us.

This excerpted and edited from TruthOrFiction.Com -

“If I were the Devil”
By Paul Harvey

I would gain control of the most powerful nation in the world;

I would delude their minds into thinking that they had come from man's effort, instead of God's blessings;

I would promote an attitude of loving things and using people, instead of the other way around;

I would dupe entire states into relying on gambling for their state revenue;

I would convince people that character is not an issue when it comes to leadership;

I would make it legal to take the life of unborn babies;

I would make it socially acceptable to take one's own life, and invent machines to make it  convenient;

I would cheapen human life as much as possible so that life of animals are valued more than human beings;

I would take God out of the schools, where even the mention of His name was grounds for a lawsuit;

I would come up with drugs that sedate the mind and target the young, and I would get sports heroes to advertise them;

I would get control of the media, so that every night I could pollute the minds of every family member for my agenda;

I would attack then family, the backbone of any nation. I would make divorce acceptable and easy, even fashionable. If the family crumbles, so does the nation;

I would compel people to express their most depraved fantasies on canvas and movies screens, and I would call it art;

I would convince the world that people are born homosexuals, and that their lifestyles should be accepted and marveled;

I would convince the people that right and wrong are determined by a few who call themselves authorities and refer to their agendas as politically correct;

I would persuade people that the church is irrelevant and out of date, the Bible is for the naive;

I would dull the minds of Christians, and make them believe that prayer is not important, and that faithfulness and obedience are optional;

I GUESS I WOULD LEAVE THINGS PRETTY MUCH THE WAY THEY ARE!
[Reference Here]

So how does this approach to understanding give us insights on how American life has changed under a Barack Obama presidency and have us understand the power of progressive thought as it is applied to our every day lives?

This excerpted and edited from NetRightDaily.Com -

If I wanted America to fail (video)By Ryan Houck

If I wanted America to fail …

To follow, not lead; to suffer, not prosper; to despair, not dream — I’d start with energy.

I’d cut off America’s supply of cheap, abundant energy.  Of course, I couldn’t take it by force. So, I’d make Americans feel guilty for using the energy that heats their homes, fuels their cars, runs their businesses, and powers their economy.

I’d make cheap energy expensive, so that expensive energy would seem cheap.

I would empower unelected bureaucrats to all-but-outlaw America’s most abundant sources of energy.  And after banning its use in America, I’d make it illegal for American companies to ship it overseas.

If I wanted America to fail …

I’d use our schools to teach one generation of Americans that our factories and our cars will cause a new Ice Age, and I’d muster a straight face so I could teach the next generation that they’re causing Global Warming.

And when it’s cold out, I’d call it Climate Change instead.

I’d imply that America’s cities and factories could run on wind power and wishes.  I’d teach children how to ignore the hypocrisy of condemning logging, mining and farming — while having roofs over their heads, heat in their homes and food on their tables.

I would never teach children that the free market is the only force in human history to uplift the poor, establish the middle class and create lasting prosperity. Instead, I’d demonize prosperity itself, so that they will not miss what they will never have.

If I wanted America to fail …

I would create countless new regulations and seldom cancel old ones. They would be so complicated that only bureaucrats, lawyers and lobbyists could understand them.  That way small businesses with big ideas wouldn’t stand a chance — and I would never have to worry about another Thomas Edison, Henry Ford or Steve Jobs.

I would ridicule as “Flat Earthers” those who urge us to lower energy costs by increasing supply. And when the evangelists of commonsense try to remind people about the law of supply and demand, I’d enlist a sympathetic media to drown them out.

If I wanted America to fail …

I would empower unaccountable bureaucracies seated in a distant capitol to bully Americans out of their dreams and their property rights.  I’d send federal agents to raid guitar factories for using the wrong kind of wood; I’d force homeowners to tear down the homes they built on their own land.

I’d make it almost impossible for farmers to farm, miners to mine, loggers to log, and builders to build.  And because I don’t believe in free markets, I’d invent false ones.  I’d devise fictitious products — like carbon credits — and trade them in imaginary markets.  I’d convince people that this would create jobs and be good for the economy.

If I wanted America to fail …

For every concern, I’d invent a crisis; and for every crisis, I’d invent the cause. Like shutting down entire industries and killing tens of thousands of jobs in the name of saving spotted owls.  When everyone learned the stunning irony that the owls were victims of their larger cousins — and not people — it would already be decades too late.

If I wanted America to fail …

I’d make it easier to stop commerce than start it — easier to kill jobs than create them — more fashionable to resent success than to seek it.  When industries seek to create jobs, I’d file lawsuits to stop them.  And then I’d make taxpayers pay for my lawyers.

If I wanted America to fail …

I would transform the environmental agenda from a document of conservation to an economic suicide pact.  I would concede entire industries to our economic rivals by imposing regulations that cost trillions.

I would celebrate those who preach environmental austerity in public while indulging a lavish lifestyle in private.  I’d convince Americans that Europe has it right, and America has it wrong.

If I wanted America to fail …

I would prey on the goodness and decency of ordinary Americans.  I would only need to convince them … that all of this is for the greater good.

If I wanted America to fail, I suppose I wouldn’t change a thing.
[Reference Here]

If we, at Politisite, wanted a free and Constitutional America to fail ... we wouldn't change a thing either - Vote Obama 2012! ... click link :) and donate now.


** Article first published as "If We Wanted A Free And Constitutional America To Fail ..." at Technorati **

Climategate: Todd Stern of the US State Department pushes forward on AGW agenda

Todd Stern, a climate negotiator during Bill Clinton’s presidency and more recently a fellow at the Center for American Progress, will assume the role of special envoy for climate change at the State Department. “We have no shortage of evidence that our world is facing a climate crisis,” said Secretary of State Hillary Clinton at the appointment of special envoy ceremony, who went on to attribute a large part of the problem to the burning of fossil fuels [evidence we now know was based on fraudulent data]. Image Credit: EPA

Climategate: Todd Stern of the US State Department pushes forward on AGW agenda

In the wake of Climategate, the level of consequences brought about due to the fraudulent activities put forth by the climate control political activists and scientists begins to make itself clear.

Todd Stern, the State Department's special envoy for climate change, stated at a February 16, 2010 briefing in Washington, "slightly less than 100 countries have indicated they want to be part of the accord ... but others may still sign on."

Further, on January 28, 2010, Todd Stern placed this statement on the State Deparment's website that read in part, "The United States today officially announced its desire to associate with the Copenhagen Accord and submitted its emissions reduction target to the Secretariat of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change. The U.S. submission reflects President Obama’s continued commitment to meeting the climate change and clean energy challenge through robust domestic and international action that will strengthen our economy, enhance our national security and protect our environment."

Why is the United States State Department playing a role in this effort of participating and policing the Copenhagen Accord when the science that is at the core of Anthropogenic Global Warming (AGW)/Climate Change has been exposed as being based on fraud?

Todd Stern serves as Special Envoy for Climate Change. He speaks about the "Focus the Nation" Clean Energy Town Halls and the Obama Administration's climate policy - "President Obama’s stimulus plan provides $80 billion of new spending and loan guarantees to accelerate our clean energy transformation. In addition, the President has called for a dramatic expansion in our investment in clean energy research and development." [ctrl-click Image to launch video of Todd Stern statement] Image Credit: engeria.gr

This excerpted and edited from AllAfrica.com -

Africa: Nearly 100 Nations to Reduce Emissions Under Copenhagen Accord
Cheryl Pellerin, AllAfrica.com - 18 February 2010

Nearly 100 countries have signed on to the Copenhagen Accord, a nonbinding agreement crafted in the final hours of the U.N. climate change conference in December 2009, meeting the first official deadline of the U.N. Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) secretariat.
----
The Copenhagen Accord is a 12-paragraph document (PDF, 182 KB) developed by leaders of 25 major greenhouse-gas-emitting nations, including the United States, covering the actions needed by industrialized and developing countries to avoid the worst effects of global climate change.

The accord seeks to limit global temperature rise by pushing developed countries to make deep but unspecified cuts in greenhouse gas emissions and by setting global and national emissions peaks "as soon as possible," with a longer deadline for developing countries.
----
By January 31, countries that wish to be associated with the accord were to notify the UNFCCC secretariat of their support. To date, Todd Stern, the State Department's special envoy for climate change, said at a February 16 briefing in Washington, "slightly less than 100 countries have indicated they want to be part of the accord ... but others may still sign on."
----
In other progress on the accord, a new high-level advisory panel on climate change financing has been created. It will be co-chaired by U.K. Prime Minister Gordon Brown and Ethiopia Prime Minister Meles Zenawi.

"The advisory group will develop practical proposals to significantly scale up both short-term and long-term financing for mitigation and adaptation strategies in developing countries," U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki moon said in a February 12 press conference with Brown and Meles. "In particular, it will look at how to jump-start the mobilization of new and innovative resources to reach $100 billion annually by 2020. Funding would include both public and private sources."

Funds will support adaptation, mitigation, technology development and transfer, and capacity building in developing countries, with priority for the most vulnerable. Panel members will include a balance of representatives from developed and developing countries.

Ban expects the group to present initial findings during the UNFCCC parties' May 31-June 11 negotiating session in Bonn, Germany, and final recommendations before the 16th conference of the UNFCCC parties (COP-16), to be held November 29-December 10 in Mexico City.

"There are probably four or five elements of the accord that need further work," Todd Stern, the State Department's special envoy for climate change, said, "and those things need to be carried forward."

These include:

• Climate fund: A Copenhagen Green Climate Fund will be established to support activities in developing countries related to climate change mitigation. The new advisory panel will study potential sources of revenue for the fund.

• Technology mechanism: A mechanism will be established to enhance ways to develop and transfer technology to support country-specific adaptation and mitigation efforts.

• Transparency: The actions of developed and developing countries will be subject to international measurement, reporting and verification in accordance with guidelines adopted by the conference of the parties. The guidelines have yet to be established.

"Whatever the ups and downs of this process at any particular moment, there is only one direction that this process can go, which is in the direction of action to reduce emissions," Todd Stern, the State Department's special envoy for climate change, said,. "I very much hope we get there sooner rather than later, and we will be doing everything we possibly can to advance that goal."
Reference Here>>

The AGW HOAX has placed the lives of people in nearly 100 nations under a process based on activities that were designed to promote life lived ... under a lie. The lie is that the science is "settled" about the effects of human activity and industrialization in our modern world ... in fact, the only settled science is that all of the data used to put forth the concept that human activity creates global warming and climate change was based fraud.

Climategate, as this discovery of mass FRAUD is becoming known, created a gusher of money that flowed into climate research and made clear just how much "AGW/Climate Change research professional fortunes" became tied to the notion of climate catastrophe. It was the fear of catastrophic climate change, after all, that unleashed the rising ocean of money by which their research came to be funded. Findings that might call the hysteria into question would also put at risk the flow of funds into their field and had to be shut down through owning the peer review process.

This article points out the these forces will not go away until they are made to pay back the money these promoters of this hoax have received already. To them, (and this includes Todd Stern, the State Department's special envoy for climate change) keeping the hoax alive is the only thing that matters.

FOLLOW THE MONEY!

Anthropogenic Global Warming Scientists, The New “Flat Earth” Society?

Top UN scientists have been forced to admit that natural weather occurrences are having a far greater effect on climate change than CO2 emissions as a continued cooling trend means there has been no global warming since 1998. But despite overwhelming signs of global cooling - China's coldest winter for 100 years and record snow levels across Northeast America - allied with temperature records showing a decline - global warming advocates still cling to the notion that the world is cooling because of global warming! Caption Credit: PrisonPlanet.com Image Credit: blahblahblog

Anthropogenic Global Warming Scientists, the new “Flat Earth” society?

Last week, a hacker revealed that a group of powerful, government-backed European scientists are controlling the results of developing global warming theory, and preventing clear debate or the development of opposing scientific evidence to AGW (Anthropogenic Global Warming). It appears that certain more objective scientists run the risk --- if they present solid evidence contrary to the popular global warming theories --- realize they run the risk of being made objects of ridicule and marginalized in efforts to gain monies from Governments for research projects designed to discover facts ... that lead to the truth.

So on one side we have the “flat earther” powerful old-world scientists … and on the other side we have the “world is round” scientific-method based researchers who are continuing to discover facts … and thereby, the truth.

Powerful forces within the scientific community have been purposely shaping information in order to bolster a concept that, at best, is speculative and seems designed to lead to one human activity that these people think is perfectly suitable for their point-of-view ... a one-world Government, based upon a socialist model of CONTROL. This CONTROL is initially focusing on calling us to “Save the Earth From Destruction”, since a fear-based program is the only way to get free people to forsake their rights and their freedoms in the concept of climate stabilization and saving humanity from imminent destruction.

South Park's depiction of Al Gore giving a lecture that will give him greater riches through the selling of "Carbon Credits" based upon a flat Earth, AGW paradigm. Image Credit: Malagent

This excerpted and edited National Review Online –

Krauthammer's Take
On the announcement that President Obama will attend the United Nations Climate Change Conference in Copenhagen
NRO Staff, Friday, November 27, 2009

Comments From Wednesday's Fox News All-Star Panel:

The global warming science is not junk science, but it's speculative. It's based on incomplete data. It's based on computer models that rest on assumptions — that, in turn, rest on an understanding of how the globe’s climate controls itself — that [are] extremely incomplete.

So its projections are speculative. But it pretends that, of course, that it is the hardest of all sciences and anybody who is skeptical is a denier — using a term used normally about the Holocaust, which is of course an event that actually happened as opposed to projections in global warming, which are speculative science.

So what you see in the [leaked global-warming] emails are people that are on somewhat shaky grounds. It is not as if there is no science at all in this, but there is contradictory evidence, such as the flattening of the rise in temperatures, which they cannot explain.

And their response is either suppression or manipulation or, even worse, the delegitimizing of — the personal attacks on — skeptics in an attempt to write them out of the journals, to get them fired, and all kinds of nasty stuff. … It puts a lot of their research in question.

I think what's interesting about Obama is he is going to be at the U.N. [conference in Copenhagen] to announce the [new] policy about climate change on the basis of — nothing. He is going to be proposing what the House has passed — that he knows is not going to pass in the Senate.

And we are actually a constitutional democracy where the president can't announce a policy unilaterally. It actually has to pass the two houses of the Congress, and our allies abroad know that, and they’re going to look at this announcement he is going to make and think it … extremely strange.
Reference Here>>

The United States has established no formal policy, yet our President, if allowed to do so, will gladly sign away our sovereignty in order to achieve the socialist political objectives of control found in the Copenhagen accords.

Further, scientists and Government forces who choose to use or believe in their conclusions that the Anthropogenic Global Warming (AGW) is a fact, are no better than previous generations of leaders in their insistence that the Earth is flat. These people should be known from this moment forward as ... "Flat-Earthers"!

From The Free Dictionary:

1) flat-earth·er (flatûrther)
n.

One who stubbornly adheres to outmoded or discredited ideas: "If you don't accept the ideas derived from Adam Smith ... then you are [considered] a flat-earther" (James Fallows).

[From the long-discredited belief that the earth is flat.]

2) flat-earther

n.

Informal - a person who does not accept or is out of touch with the realities of modern life