How race determines the news we get — and don’t get, Part Two

How ‘race’ determines the news we get — and don’t get, Part 2 by Peter Burrows, 2/4/20.  elburropete@gmail.com – silvercityburro.com 

In Part 1, I wrote that the media has been widely criticized BY LIBERALS for not reporting that the big spike in attacks on Jews in New Yok City has been caused by black assailants. As Abe Greenwald, senior editor of Commentary, wrote, “Throughout 2019, African-Americans attacked Orthodox Jews in Brooklyn on a more-or-less weekly basis, and it barely ever made the mainstream news.” 

Actually, Abe, it was on a more-or-less DAILY basis, and it’s no surprise that such attacks didn’t make the mainstream news. As columnist Ben Shapiro explained, “White supremacists attacking left-leaning Jews fits a desired narrative. Black teenagers beating up Hasidic Jews in Williamsburg doesn’t. And so the left ignores the WRONG TYPE of anti-Semitism.”   

What is surprising is that so many Jews are surprised by this “wrong type of anti-Semitism.”  A 12/29/19 headline in The Jewish Week, a New York City publication, reads: “Anti-Semitic Crime Wave Mystifies Chasidim.” (Chasidim are orthodox Jews also known as Hasidim or Hasidic.)   Mystifies? Really? 

Orthodox Jews test about one standard deviation above the rest of us on IQ tests, but I guess political correctness trumps brains. Maybe this dumb, old gentile can explain the recent wave of anti-Semitic attacks to the mystified Chasidim: 

(1) Anti-Semitism has a long history among black Americans. Larry Elder, in his book, “The Ten Things You Can’t Say In America,” published in 2000, wrote: “According to an Anti-Defamation League study, anti-Semitism is at an all-time low, except in the black community, where anti-Semitism is three times the national average.”   More recent ADL surveys are not as alarming, but levels of anti-Semitism in blacks still poll at least 50 percent higher than the national average. This fact is rarely mentioned in the media, but surely Jews must be aware of it.  

(2)  New York State recently passed a law, effective January 1 of 2020, that allows people arrested for a variety of crimes to be released without bail.  The “no jail-no bail” law reflects the liberal belief that blacks are disproportionately policed and are ‘victims’ of the criminal justice system. Anyone who notes that blacks disproportionally commit criminal acts is a racist. 

The law requires judges to free people arrested for, amongst other crimes, non-sexual assaults where no physical injury occurred.  In the week BEFORE the law went into effect, seven of eight people arrested for anti-Semitic attacks were released because, according to a “law enforcement source” quoted by the New York Post, “The de Blasio administration has made it clear that we all need to get into compliance with bail reform now.”   

The eighth case involved a 65-year-old Jewish man who was punched and kicked while his assailant screamed, “Fuck you, Jew bastard.” Since the attack involved an injury, the assailant, race unidentified, was denied bail PENDING A PSYCHOLOGICAL EXAMINATION.  I imagine if he is found to have suffered from temporary derangement, he will be set free and will apologize to his victim. (Sarcasm libs, sarcasm.)  

The politically correct New York Post article also failed to mention the race of any of the other assailants, but it did have photos of two, both women. One admitted to yelling, “Fuck Jews” while assaulting three Jewish women, and the other allegedly said, “You fucking Jew. The end is coming for you,” while she assaulted a Jewish woman.  Both were white women wearing MAGA hats. (More sarcasm, libs.)    

Dov Hikind, founder of Americans Against Anti-Semitism, was quoted as saying, “You have to beat the hell out of somebody — or murder them — for there to be any consequences.  Otherwise, you are set free.  It’s open season in New York — (and) it’s the Jewish people in particular who have been targeted.” 

Targeted by whom, Mr. Hikind, and why are they being set free? Political correctness got your tongue? 

Let me summarize for the mystified Chasidim:  A lot of blacks hate your guts; liberal Democrats have virtually decriminalized most hate crimes as part of a program to appease black voters; anti-Semitic blacks can now get in your face with little or no penalty, maybe even get rewarded for it with their picture in the paper.   

Since blacks are much more important to the Democratic Party than are Jews, don’t expect Democrat leaders to ever demand that blacks take responsibility.  Oh, no, that would be ‘racist.’ What is really appalling, is that many liberal Jews agree! 

A 12/31/19 headline in The Guardian read, “Liberal groups say the new policing measures put forward by Mayor de Blasio will divide communities.” And these communities aren’t divided now? 

This was after de Blasio ordered increased police patrols, mostly in Jewish neighborhoods. He also announced plans to add security cameras in Jewish neighborhoods and beefed-up security around synagogues and at Jewish events.  

The article had this mind-boggling quote from David Klion of the progressive Jewish Currents magazine (POC means ‘people of color’): “Flooding ‘POC’ neighborhoods with cops is going to carry real costs, potentially even fatal ones, for tens of thousands of people who have no complicity in these attacks. I’m also deeply uncomfortable with the optics of cops functioning as security for Jews against POC.”  

He’s “uncomfortable with the optics.”  Typical liberal. He’s more concerned with virtue signaling than doing anything practical that would protect Jews from blacks.  Don’t want to offend POC. That would be ‘racist,’ don’t ‘cha know.   

Racist. That’s what those horrid Republicans are, and that’s why Jews will continue to vote for Democrats, even though the party overlooks anti-Semitism within its own ranks. More on that in Part Three. 

How ‘race’ determines the news we get — and don’t get

How ‘race’ determines the news we get — and don’t get, by Peter Burrows, 2/3/20.  elburropete@gmail.com – silvercityburro.com 

Over the past two years, there has been an appalling increase in anti-Semitic hate crimes in New York City.  By one estimate, such crimes increased by more than twenty percent last year to over 1850 incidents, and that’s just the reported ones.  This means that on average, at least five times a day a Jew in New York was verbally or physically abused.   

You haven’t heard much about these hate-crimes because almost all of the attacks against Jews have been committed by black people, and the liberal media follows an unwritten rule to avoid mention of the criminal’s race if the criminal is black.  That unwritten rule is finally being challenged.  

The Daily Caller had a story headlined, “The Media Can’t Keep Ignoring The Racial Element of the New York Pogrom,” by David Benkof, 12/31/19, in which the author wrote, “Right now, the problem is overwhelmingly black New Yorkers attacking Jews.”  (A pogrom is an organized attack against Jews.)  

He added, “For months now, African-Americans have been assaulting visibly Jewish residents (and) the only way to tell that the perpetrators are overwhelmingly black has been to look at mug shots and video footage of the attacks.” 

Michael Benjamin, a black Jew, wrote in the New York Post, “New York’s epidemic of anti-Semitic attacks is horrifying. It’s also maddening that city leaders won’t address the elephant in the room — that the suspects in these heinous acts are black.” 

If New York’s Jews had been attacked by whites, you can be sure the coverage would have been 24-7 with the blame put squarely on Donald Trump. No matter, New York Mayor Bill de Blasio tried to do that anyway, claiming at a press conference last June that antisemitism is a “right-wing movement.” He backed off on that a little, saying, “The violent threat, the threat that is ideological, is very much from the right.”  

For once, some of New York’s liberals didn’t buy into such a moronic cliche. Councilman Chaim Deutsch, a Democrat from Brooklyn with constituents who have recently been attacked, said, “I don’t agree with the mayor — I have not seen any white supremacists coming in here committing these hate crimes.”  

No problem, because it’s still Trump’s fault. On a Sunday Fox News show last December 29, de Blasio said “an atmosphere of hate” has been “emanating from Washington” the past few years.  By implication, Trump has somehow encouraged black people to attack Jews.   

This was too much for Dov Hikind, a Democrat and founder of Americans Against Antisemitism: “When you have the Farrakhans of the world (and) members of the United States Congress – Tlaib, Omar, AOC – indulging in hate speech and getting away with it — within the Democratic Party there’s a double standard.  (T)he mayor of New York City has continued to call the hate ‘coming from the right.’ All the hate in New York is coming from the left.”  

Repeat: “All the hate in New York is coming from the left.” We know that’s true because that’s what NBC, ABC, CBS, CNN and MSNBC have been saying for months, right? (Sarcasm libs, sarcasm.)   

What we are seeing is the politics of hate coming home to roost for the Democrats. For decades, the Democrats and the media have demonized anybody who doesn’t agree with them as hate-filled bigots.  As Hillary Clinton said, half of Trump supporters are a “basket of deplorables, racist, sexist, homophobic, xenophobic, Islamophobic—you name it.”   

Unfortunately, many Democrats actually believe that. There is no evidence supporting that contention, but when have liberals ever needed evidence to support what they “know?” Democrats are like Alfonso Bedoya in ‘The Treasure of the Sierra Madre,’ slightly altered:   

“Evidence? We ain’t got no evidence! We don’t need no evidence! We don’t have to show you any stinking evidence!”   

If Trump voters were half as bad as the Democrats and the media would like them to be, the evidence would be on display every day.  The news would be filled with stories of hate crimes committed by all those evil-white deplorables who “cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren’t like them,” to quote a former president.  

Instead, the news is about Jews being attacked and the media are reluctant to tell us who is doing the attacking. Why, some might even say that the media is guilty of (GASP!) racism.  As columnist Ben Shapiro explained, “White supremacists attacking left-leaning Jews fits a desired narrative. Black teenagers beating up Hasidic Jews in Williamsburg doesn’t. And so the left ignores the WRONG TYPE of anti-Semitism.”  That is, blacks get a pass because they are blacks. 

Gosh, Hillary, you said Trump supporters were “racist, sexist, homophobic, xenophobic, Islamophobic, you name it,” but you didn’t specify that they are anti-Semites.  Well, of course they are, but maybe you didn’t want to mention anti-Semitism because so many black Democrats are anti-Semites and you didn’t want to risk offending that very important Democrat constituency?   

More sarcasm libs, but there is some truth there. Keep reading.     

The Democrat Party is all about identity politics, with key constituencies identified by race, gender, lack of gender, sexual orientation, ethnic identity, religion, “you name it.” All are “victims” of something that electing Democrats will put an end to.  This is primitive, tribal politics.  It’s inherently divisive because to be a victim, there must be a victimizer.   

Some Democrat tribes are large, such as black Americans, some are small, such as Jews or gays. Blacks have greater victim status because, after all, most Jews are white people.  And here is where it gets tricky for the Democrats. Black anti-Semitism has been around for a LONG time.  This is what black activist James Baldwin wrote in Commentary magazine back in 1948, over 70 years ago:  

“The Negro’s outlets are desperately constricted. In his dilemma he turns first upon himself and then upon whatever most represents to him his own emasculation. Here the Jew is caught in the American crossfire. The Negro, facing a Jew, hates, at bottom, not his Jewishness but the color of his skin. It is not the Jewish tradition by which he has been betrayed but the tradition of his native land. But just as a society must have a scapegoat, so hatred must have a symbol. Georgia has the Negro and Harlem has the Jew.” 

This is despicable, then and now, from “the Negro” or from anybody.  No political party should tolerate such an attitude, but the Democrat Party does. Proof: Google ‘Obama Farrakhan photo.’      

This raises the question: Why do most Jews continue to support the Democrat Party? More on that in Part Two.  

“This diagram puts to rest the idea that CO2 is a threat to mankind.”

“This diagram puts to rest the idea that CO2 is a threat to mankind.” by Peter Burrows, 1/13/20 elburropete@gmail.com – silvercityburro.com

 

The Heartland Institute is a well-known free-market think tank based in Arlington Heights, Illinois, covering everything from school reform to public spending. Since 2008, Heartland has hosted 12 International conferences on climate change, the latest in Madrid, Spain, as counterpoint to the UN’s annual COP conference which was held in Madrid this year.  

 

The Heartland shadow conference didn’t get much, if any, press.  Not surprising given that they are there to take the punch bowl away from the 27,000 attendees who travel the world to attend COP conferences every year, where they pass unenforceable laws curbing carbon dioxide, CO2, emissions.  (See my blog of 12/20/19: Cop25: Another reason to get out of the UN.)

 

I know some of you are thinking, “Serves ‘em right, Burro. Anybody who says CO2 is not a problem SHOULD be ignored by the press, right up to the point where they swing from the gallows. Besides, even if the world doesn’t need saving from CO2, it sure as Hell needs saving from evil-dirty-bastard capitalists and if curbing CO2 can destroy capitalism, then by all means demonize CO2. The end justifies the means, Comrade!!”

 

Right. And Greta Thunberg is a warrior princess, not a sad little child.  

 

One of the presenters at the at the Heartland conference was William Happer, professor  emeritus of physics at Princeton University. Best known for his pioneering work on laser-guide star adaptive optics, Happer recently resigned as technology adviser to President Trumps’ National Security Council when it became apparent the Trump administration was not going to challenge the climate change hysteria with the scientific rigor Dr. Happer wanted. 

 

Here’s a 19-minute video of Happer’s presentation.  At about minute 9:25 he states that the science can’t be disputed; at 13:50 he states that the CO2 effect is “saturated” and that adding more CO2 is analogous to putting a second coat of red paint on a house: doesn’t change the color much. 

 

For those of you who would like a hard copy of Dr. Happer’s graphs, blogger Donn Dears, a retired GE engineer, covers Happer’s presentation in two articles, “Good news for Humanity, Part 1” and “Part 2. https://ddears.com/donns-articles/ 

 

This is from Dears’ “Part 1” article: 

“Every newspaper and TV News Broadcast should have heralded the most important news story from Madrid in December. This diagram puts to rest the idea that CO2 is a threat to mankind.

image.jpegGraph from Dr. W. Happer’s press briefing, Madrid, Spain, December 2019 (Note)

‘The top curve is the theoretical heat loss from the Earth into the vacuum of space for the range of frequencies, assuming no atmosphere. This is Planck’s curve for heat loss from the Earth’s blackbody. (Notations above the curves are of various chemical compounds at their spectral frequencies.)

“The sawtooth curve shows the actual heat loss through the Earth’s atmosphere for each frequency, where the percentages of CO2 are 0 ppm, (in green), 400 ppm (in black) and 800 ppm (in red). The sawtooth curve is known as the Schwarzschild curve. (The heat loss for all other compounds are for conditions as they exist today.) 

“Of particular importance are the circled, red and black, CO2 curves. These two curves, highlighted by the circle, are virtually the same, indicating that heat loss is nearly unchanged after doubling CO2 from 400 to 800 ppm.

“In other words, adding CO2 to the atmosphere so that atmospheric levels of CO2 doubles (from 400 ppm to 800 ppm) has virtually no effect on temperatures. CO2 is saturated, and adding more CO2 to the atmosphere has a minimal effect.”

Attachments area
Preview YouTube video William Happer Talks Climate Alarmism During COP25 in Madrid

Would Martin Luther King be a Republican today?

Would Martin Luther King be a Republican today? By Peter Burrows elburropete@gmail.com – silvercityburro.com 1/8/20

Over 56 years ago, Martin Luther King stood on the steps of the Lincoln Memorial in Washington, D.C., and famously said, “I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character.”

If his children have grown up to be Democrats, I’m afraid they’re still dreaming.  If anything, racism is stronger today than when MLK made that speech, but it’s not anti-black racism anymore, it’s anti-white racism.

Just look at the consternation building in the Democratic presidential primary race.  Kamala Harris and Jullian Castro have dropped out, leaving Cory Booker and Deval Patrick as the only other ‘candidates of color’ and neither of them are polling well enough to qualify for the debates, leaving all the frontrunners white.

Former presidential candidate and ex-DNC chairman Howard Dean said, “If we have two old white guys at the top of this ticket, we will lose.”  He was referring to Bernie Sanders and Joe Biden.  Nothing about Bernie’s brain-dead socialism or Biden’s many senior moments.  Oh, no. Their biggest negative is that they are a couple of WHITE guys.  Old, too, although I doubt if ‘old’ would have been mentioned if Maxine Waters and Charlie Rangel were leading in the polls.

Howard Dean is hardly alone with his concerns. LaTosha Brown, co-founder of Black Lives Matter, recently took a look at the Democrat primary and said, “I’m over with white men running the country.”  She seems to have forgotten Barrack Obama.

Rep. Barbara Lee, D-CA, past chair of the Congressional Black Caucus, said of the nominating process, “Systemic racism permeates everything in this country. —I don’t know if white Democrats are really stepping up and looking at how the system is biased and prevents others from coming through.”  David Axelrod, former Obama adviser, said that the frontrunners being all white was “a bad look.”

White skin is a “bad look.” Oh, my.   And “the content of their character?” Predetermined by the color of their skin, dummy!

This war on white people used to be directed only at Republicans.  Obama’s remarks about whites “clinging to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren’t like them” was about Republicans, as was Hillary’s comment about ‘deplorable’ Trump supporters who were “racist, sexist, homophobic, xenophobic, Islamophobic, you name it.”

Republicans should not take too much comfort from the spread of this new racism to include white Democrats, because white Democrats, while they are imbued with racism just like all white people, recognize their racism, feel guilty about it, and will do anything to atone for it.  Reparations? Yes! Yes!

White Democrats can be forgiven, but not white Republicans, who are simply bad people.  You don’t believe me? Maybe you’ll believe Michael Moore, who said, “Two-thirds of all white guys voted for Trump. That means anytime you see three white guys walking down the street toward you, two of them voted for Trump. You need to move over to the other sidewalk because these are not good people —. You should be afraid of them.”

Hmmmmm. It wasn’t too long ago that three BLACK guys walking down the street were people to be afraid of, something even Jesse Jackson admitted to. Here’s a little thought experiment. Imagine you’re walking down the street at night and three white guys are walking toward you, two wearing MAGA hats.  Are you really going to be afraid of them?

How about three black guys wearing hoodies? Since you reject racial profiling -– unless the guys are white— you won’t be crossing the street, will you? Ha! Now, what if the three black guys were all wearing Black Lives Matter hats?  Still on the other side of the street, aren’t you? Finally, what if the three black guys were all wearing MAGA hats?

Blacks who voted for Trump must be REALLY bad people, but would you be afraid of them? Of course not.  People who wear MAGA hats almost never initiate conflict. In fact, both a Black Lives Matter hat and a MAGA hat give us a strong indication of the content of the character of those wearing the hats.  One is probably a racist and one is probably not.

I bet Martin Luther King would vote for the MAGA hat guy.

Christmas, music and Muhammad

Christmas, music and Muhammad by Peter Burrows 12/24/19 elburropete@gmail.com – silvercityburro.com

One of the things I enjoy most about this time of year is the music.  The religion of Christianity has inspired some of the most beautiful music ever written.  Of course, that’s a subjective opinion but one shared by many people of all religions, with one exception: Islam.  Muhammad disapproved of music.

Muhammad disapproved of a lot of things: infidels, hypocrites, apostates, alcohol, pictures of living things and even dogs, to name a few.  Since the Holy Koran tells us in verse 4:80 that to obey Muhammad is to obey Allah, what Muhammad said about music is therefore Allah’s eternal law.

Let’s look at a few things Muhammad said about music, musicians and those who enjoy music.  My favorite is, “On the Day of Resurrection, Allah will pour molten lead into the ears of whoever sits listening to a songstress.”

When I first read that, I thought to myself, “You’re going to need a BIG bucket of lead for me, Allah.”  In my life I have spent countless hours listening to one songstress after another, from Roberta Peters to Lady Gaga.

It was Muhammad’s opinion that, “Song makes hypocrisy grow in the heart as water does herbage.”  In Islam, hypocrisy is defined as claiming to be a Muslim but failing to pay attention to the required rituals, such as daily prayers.  Music was considered something that would distract from those religious requirements, as would alcohol.

If you play any instrument, including the drum, on the Day of Judgement there will be “seventy thousand angels” with maces of fire pummeling you on the head. Singers and adulterers get the pummeling, too. We know that’s true because Muhammad said so.

However, sharia law says, “It is permissible to play the tambourine at weddings, circumcisions, and other times, even if it has bells on its sides.” Bells!?! Oh, thank you, Allah!!

The bottom line for Muslims, from al-islam.org: “Let us seek refuge from the temptations of Shaitaan so that he may never lead us into the disgraceful vice of listening to music.”

Unfortunately, Muslims also think Shaitaan shouldn’t tempt us non-Muslims, either, and in Muslim ruled nations strict adherence to sharia law means no Christian can recite aloud, let alone sing, the Evangel.  While I can find no specific rule, if music is haram, forbidden, Christian music must be double haram.

I’m afraid it’s only a matter of time before Christian concerts are targeted by devout Muslims, much like the 2017 attack in Manchester, England, that killed 22 at an Ariana Grande concert.  I pray this will never happen, but as you listen to Renee Fleming sing Schubert’s Ave Maria, be thankful you live in a nation where Islam does not rule.

Enjoy!!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KT_prP_MNaQ

Renee Fleming, Ave Maria, 5:15

 

COP25: Another reason to get out of the UN

COP25: Another reason to get out of the UN by Peter Burrows elburropete@gmai.com – silvercityburro.com 12/20/19 

What would you think if Congress sent everybody in Grant County to Madrid for two weeks to solve the world’s climate “crisis,” and the most significant thing we agreed upon was that we’d do it all over again next year in Glasco, Scotland?  A waste of money, ya think? 

I’m alluding to a United Nations climate conference that just concluded, called COP25, officially known as “the 25th Session of the Conference of the Parties (COP25) to the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC),” which took place in Madrid, Spain, December 2-15.  

OK, I cheated a little, because the conference had “only” 27,000 attendees and Grant County has about 29,000 people. If I had said, “able-bodied adult Grant Countians,” it would have been closer. Regardless, you get the idea.  

Some of you really smart folks are thinking, “OMG, Burro, does COP ‘25’ mean they have been doing this for TWENTY-FIVE years!?!?”   

Actually, a little longer. The first UN climate conference was in Rio de Janeiro in 1992, 27 years ago. The Conference of the Parties (COP) nomenclature began in 1995, and refers to the 165 nations -– the parties — that signed on to the UNFCCC. That leaves 28 UN member nations that didn’t sign, probably because they couldn’t afford to send delegations off to party-down someplace new every year. 

That’s being a little unfair to those attendees who sincerely believe the UN can do something to curb global greenhouse gas emissions, but, after 27 years of failing to do that, a cynic could be forgiven for thinking the word “exhausted” in the following BBC summary of COP25 is just a euphemism for “hung over.” The following is slightly edited, my caps:  

“COP25: Longest climate talks end with compromise deal By Matt McGrath, BBC Environment correspondent, Madrid, 15 December 2019: Difficult issues proved impossible to resolve in Madrid. The longest UN climate talks on record ended in Madrid with a compromise dealExhausted delegates reached agreement on the key question of increasing the global response to curbing carbon. All countries will need to put new climate PLEDGES on the table by the time of the NEXT major conference in Glasgow NEXT YEAR. Divisions over other questions – including carbon markets – were delayed until the NEXT gathering. —After two extra days and nights of negotiations, delegates finally agreed a deal that will see new, improved carbon cutting plans on the table by the time of the Glasgow conference NEXT YEAR.”  

I can confidently predict next year’s COP will have similar results.  This is because, even if the climate alarmists are correct, it will still be in the developing nations’ best interest to expand electricity production as fast as possible by the cheapest means possible, which means burning more and more coal.  If you are an Indian without electricity, you really don’t give a damn about Greta Thunberg’s feelings, do you? Or, for that matter, do you care if Manhattan is under water?  

To put the matter into perspective, India is the world’s fourth largest CO2 emitter, at about 7% of global emissions.  (China is about 30%, the U.S. 15%, and the EU 9%.)  India emits about half of what the U.S. emits, but India has four times the population.  To get to only one-half the per capita level of the U.S. would be an increase equal to 150% of today’s total U.S emissions.  We couldn’t offset India’s growth even if we wanted to.  Add China, Africa, and Southeast Asia and you get the picture. 

Some of you may be thinking, “But Burro, we can institute a world-wide ‘cap-and-trade’ policy that would give developed nations incentives to reduce their per capita CO2 emissions.” In fact, cap-and-trade has been part of the UN effort since COP3 in Kyoto, way back in 1997.  Developed nations were given Assigned Amount Units, AAUs, representing allowed CO2 emissions, and Certified Emission Reductions, CERs, were created as marketable certificates representing CO2 reductions achieved. Real simple, right?                                                                                                                                                                        Here’s a blurb I got from CFACT on COP25: “The big COP breakdown was over something called “Article 6” which deals with international carbon markets.  Australia refused to give up past carbon credits and was joined by Brazil which shut the whole thing down.” The “past carbon credits” referred to Kyoto-era CERs and AAUs. The bottom line is that the UN has been trying to figure out how to make cap-and-trade work since 1997, to no avail.                                                                                                                                                     

Here’s a headline that sums it up: “The Cap and Trade Market Is Going Global—If Politics Are Put Aside By Renae Reints Fortune Magazine December 14, 2019.”  IF politics can be put aside??  That’s kind of like saying you can fly off the top of the Empire State Building if you can get your arms to move up-and-down fast enough. For those of you who want to get into the weeds on the problems with the UN cap-and-trade, here’s another interesting article:  

https://www.carbonbrief.org/cop25-key-outcomes-agreed-at-the-un-climate-talks-in-madrid 

All this COP nonsense proves that government bureaucracies are, as Ronald Reagan said, “the nearest thing to eternal life we’ll ever see on this earth.” What’s especially outrageous is that almost everybody knows that COP’s mission is impossible to achieve.  The idea was that nations would agree to cut carbon emissions enough to prevent global temperatures from rising by 1.5 -2 degrees centigrade by 2100.    

That may have seemed feasible in 1992, not so today. In fact, greenhouse gas emissions are actually increasing at an accelerating rate, according to the climate alarmist in the video below, Dr. Peter Carter. (A medical type of doctor.)  He is confident this will lead to a “biosphere collapse,” which will mean the “destruction of the earth” and “the end of humanity.”  

I strongly recommend you watch the 23-minute video. I enjoyed it very much and agree with Dr. Carter that “nothing good is ever going to come out of these COPs,” and that we will never reduce emissions enough to make a difference. Trump had the good sense to pull the U.S. out of the agreements reached at COP21, held in Paris, the “Paris agreement” we hear so much about.  

I think it’s all nonsense, but what if Dr. Carter is right? Then there is nothing we can do. If he is wrong, there is nothing we should do.  What if he is right, but off by 50-100 years? Then there are two things we can do: research CO2 sequestration and develop cheap, safe nuclear power.  That makes a lot more sense than subsidizing wind mills, solar panels and Tesla cars.  

12/18/19 You Tube, 23-min, Dr. Peter Carter at COP25 = we are doomed: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oa13KrOvE2s 

This article supports the above and also gives a good summary of new coal projects = we are doomed:  https://www.counterpunch.org/2019/12/19/biosphere-collapse/ 

A You Tube minimum wage tutorial

A You Tube minimum wage tutorial 12/3/19 by Peter Burrows elburropete@gmail.com – silvercityburro.com 

Milton Friedman, Thomas Sowell and Walter Williams have been my favorite economists for many decades. If you watch them on You Tube, you’ll see why.  

Here are three brief You Tubes on the minimum wage by my gurus. If they don’t come through, just go to You Tube and search by name and “minimum wage” and look for those with about the times of those below.  

The first, by Walter Williams, is the longest at almost teminutes.  Well worth the time. The next, featuring Thomas Sowell, is from a 1981 Firing Line show and is less than three minutes. (His latest You Tube appearances show how well he has aged. Still writing, still incisive at 89.) The final is Milton Friedman and is less than three minutes. There are many more by these three on the minimum wage, and on many other topics as well.   

I don’t care if you are a Republican or a Democrat, if after watching these you still believe that minimum wage laws are a good idea, you are either stupid, a union toady or a racist. Strong letter to follow.  

 

WEW 9:58 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z8uz3uafMe0&t=65s Dr. Williams gives a little economics lesson getting to his point.  

TS 2:50 –https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r4SIEl1j8e4 To say the lib woman is invincibly stupid is perhaps redundant, but it feels good to say it.   

Milt 2:31 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WTLwANVtnkA Dr. Friedman addresses both lousy schools and minimum wage laws as causes of poverty. He was a treasure.