White House Science Czar John Holdren- Forced abortions, compulsory sterilization, a global regime to control population and now Global Climate Disruption
John Holdren, another one of those loony far-left worker bees that Obama has burrowing around in the White House, has now presented us with another addition to Webster's Dictionary.
Ladies and gentlemen, Global Climate Disruption.
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/09/16/white-house-global-warming-global-climate-disruption/
Of course, this is the same kook who has spoken in favor of compulsory sterilization, forced abortion, and a global regime to control population. But no one in the media dare call him an extremist -that term is reserved for the the Tea Party folks.
So, in order to get this new phrase down pat into your vocabulary (which will be compulsory), practice, practice, practice.
"Global climate disruption....Global climate destruction?"
12 comments:
I don't know about that earlier stuff, because I haven't heard it, and you provide no direct quotes or context.
But "Global Climate Disruption" sounds like a spot on, accurate term.
Thanks for letting me know.
P.S. It seems to me that the Tea Party are going to take the Republicans down in flames in a year that started out looking so hopeful for them. I count at least four senate seats the DOP (Dilapated Old Party) will lose this year that they could easily have won. Right Angle is going down as the woman who made it possible to re-elect Harry Reid, who even the Democrats would be better off without.
Despite whatever nutty things this guy may have said in the past, "global climate disruption" is a better description. Calling it "global warming" was a bad move from the start, as people think it's all simply about temperatures going up (as they don't know the difference between climate and weather). That's why you get lame-brained arguments like "Hey! It's cold this winter! So much for global warming!"
"Climate change" is more accurate as well, but it doesn't really indicate the possible severe implications of the situation.
Of course, when you change what it's called, deniers think that the goal posts are being moved, but the facts behind the whole issue still haven't changed.
Siarlys,
To the tea party voter, this is not about whether Republicans retake the house or senate. It's about putting true conservatives in office to combat what the Dems and Obama are doing to our country.
Lance,
How about calling it the four seasons?
How about calling it the four seasons?
How about taking the time to understand what it even is?
And hey...what's up with all this "spherical Earth" nonsense? If the Earth was round, then don't you think we'd fall off of it? Gravity? Don't get me started on that scam.
This climate scamming will not stop until we all understand climategate, pseudo science, cooked data, bogus hockey stick graphs and "International Monitary Fund" control. The "carbon exchange" is big money for the scammers (pseudo scientists, the U.N., Valarie Jarrett, Obama, Al Gore, Green Jobs con artists etc.). Because global warming has tanked and climate change is now going into the trash as well, Holdren has to come up with a term to keep the hopes of a global international fund alive.
What is that saying? If it walks like a duck...
Squid
Squid,
You are wrong. Simple as that. Check this for your bogus "hockey stick" argument.
My mother is the only true conservative in America. and she doesn't vote for Tea Party candidates. A true conservative would have a direct answer to the question "Which taxes will you raise, and/or which programs will you cut, in order to reduce the national debt? None of the Tea Party characters can answer that question.
"Which taxes will you raise, and/or which programs will you cut, in order to reduce the national debt?"
Answer taxes-none-programs-all (except defense-intelligence ).
Cut all programs, Gary? Come on...that's crazy. Is there a lot that could and should be cut? Sure. But all of them?
I think that conservatives are in denial that if we don't have taxes, then we just go further into debt. Maybe the Democrats really are "tax and spend" but the Republicans are "borrow and spend". One way or another, we're still gonna pay for it.
Lance,
I am against tax and spend as well as borrow and spend.
How about we tax low and spend low?
Is that too radical for you?
"Low" is a weasel word Gary.
It is somewhere between "cut all programs except defense" and "keep all programs that a sizeable number of voters have a vested interest in keeping."
An honest candidate for public office would provide a hit list, in detail.
Post a Comment