Welcome to the New America—the United States of “Disneyland!”
Who among us cannot remember the wonder of Disneyland when we first experienced it? This view of a new idea of an entertainment tickled our fantasy, where we experience not only the past, but glimpse into the future—worlds of wonder we traveled in our entertainment machine of rides and programs, titillating our imagination.
Yet now our nation’s journey is taking twists and turns that make the most creative journey of Disney’s imagine seem opaque. For now our nation, our great ship of state is on a journey beyond the reason of mortal man—experiencing actions and interactions unknown in our, or any nation on this planets, empirical history.
Where do we begin? What is the greatest shock we have? The other day I was reading an excerpt of the youth of our present president. It was the childish comments, of his spending his time of knowledge smoking dope, and goofing off. What was strange was my reaction; I thought to myself, thank God. Now isn’t that strange? At first I was shocked at my observation, and then when thinking of it, it made sense. What do we call those who choose the path of dope smokers, looser, and those who take the hallucinations of artificial drug activity over the wonder of life? Most of us can only offer empathy, sorrow and sadness. Yet when I thought of our president having destroyed his mental capacity to reason at a young age—it was a relief. For it all of a sudden made sense—it isn’t that’s he’s just stupid, there’s a reason.
Isn’t it also wonderful, if we survive this attack from the cultural communism of this administration; in the future we can use this president as the perfect icon? Here was a president, who through heavy drug uses in his youth; lost the ability to think, to reason. Leading him to believe in the absolute hallucination of Marxism, and the ideology of Keynesian socialism using fiscal and monetary policy!
There are so many other things this nation is experiencing that are equally compelling. I was reading an article—the government by legislation—makes rules that our government accounting cannot tell the truth. Now is that not a bit of a stretch? What does it mean when we develop accounting that doesn’t show the actual facts? In the world of the business community, we’d call that fraud. Yet in our new America, we have strayed so far from our course, that we reject even the concept of “reality!”
Think of the absolute “fantasyland” concept of Keynes with the imagination of Disney. Can any among us say Disney had anything on Keynes? What is there about Keynes that allowed him to so influence the world we live in today? When we have the history of his “imagination”, his absolute insanity we identify as “economics.” While in application it is nothing but socialism, in the guise of fiscal and monetary centralized planning. Could even Disney have come up with anything as much of a fantasy as creating money out of thin air, spending it, and then believing that it could somehow make the world better?
Today we have those in this nation who say this nation is the problem with the world! What are the possible criteria which would result in such a conclusion? In what state of irrational reasoning would one have to be in order to possibly consider such?
What nation has by example shown more altruism, compassion, and consideration for all the populations of every country on this planet? Is there any nation that has even made the consideration of ever being as benevolent as this nation? Not only the inanity of our government sending wealth we do not have to others, while we borrow. Our population that responds with generosity that makes all other insignificant whenever a tragedy occurs.
Yet we in this nation seem determined, through government dictate, to destroy the very fiber, the foundations of our society. While this nation accelerates toward centralized control of our society, a totalitarian concept of government that even the most ardent soviet communist would not have envisioned.
Who can comprehend a society where the individual is not even free to choose the size of a soda they wish to purchase. It’s beyond comprehension.
Yet at the same time there are in this nation, those who would destroy our economy under the auspiciousness of ideological, non-scientific, without example, concept such as global warming. Interestingly this follows the same template of socialism, and the critical theorist. There is no requirement of example, proof, or even “reasoning” to make conclusions; while at the same time the legislation—which has allowed the bureaucracy to make the laws, and how they will be enforced—is so punitive, capable of shutting down thorough dictate viable business activity.
Now what is the foundation of their illogical ideology that we as a world are experiencing global warming? If we are as they say—is it abnormal, and do we have any indication that perhaps the world has been through cycles of higher temperatures in the earth’s empirical history? What could possibly be a fact to determine that if we are having some global warming—that it can be in any way created by the actions of man? Sounds simple doesn’t it?
Let’s start at the foundation. Today they say the earth is in global warming. Is not the question, in comparison to what measurement? Our earth’s history has—even by the geologist and paleoclimatology—had some startling changes in its history. Confirmed, by their research is that once we have had ice ages, big ones and little ones. So it would seem obvious, in some hypothetical conclusion, this planet was experiencing “global cooling.” If this is fact—then is it not obvious, if this is the baseline, then we’ve been in “global warming” for quite a spell…and most would probably believe this is a good thing.
Yet today the argument is that this earth has too much CO2. Again, what is the comparative? Sadly it takes so little knowledge to dismiss this conclusion it’s really pathetic. Here is an example. Just a few days ago, they found an insect—fossilized—with a wingspan of 18 inched. Guess you’d call it a “transfusion mosquito.” In the article, it stated he only way such an animal, of this size could have been—was if the oxygen concentration on the earth at the time of its existence was much higher. From the measurement of rocks, and ice, which trap the atmosphere of the time—they concluded that the percentage of oxygen in the air, then, was 31% to 35% of the atmosphere. Today the oxygen content of the atmosphere—our atmosphere in which it is the biosphere where mankind lives—is 20%. So is it not a logical conclusion that the “global warmist” would make—it is the breathing of mankind that is taking in the Oxygen, converting it to CO2 are not only creating “global warming,” but are also reducing the oxygen in the air.
Is it not as viable? What’s the correction to that problem—perhaps a new ecological quintessence—that we only exhale every other breath. Is this not as logical as the rational that man can change the composition of the gases in the atmosphere?
Let’s look at air today: Air is the name given to atmosphere used in breathing and photosynthesis. Dry air contains roughly (by volume) 78.09% nitrogen, 20.95% oxygen, 0.93% argon, 0.039% carbon dioxide, and small amounts of other gases.
Now for those who have forgotten what a % sign means—it is that we need to add two decimals point to the left. So as an example the air we breathe has 0.039% carbon dioxide, which is written as not a % would be .00039 of the atmosphere, is carbon dioxide.
Now let’s think of this for just a moment. What does that mean? Well it means that the CO2 our lungs need to sense, causing us to breath, is very little in the air. As such when one hyperventilates, what do we do? Do we give them oxygen? No we don’t, instead we have them exhale into a bag; increase the amount of CO2 in their exhaled gases, so the bodies sensors can identify it.
What else do we know about CO2? Well we all know is that plants have an actions called Photosynthesis; "light," and synthesis, "putting together", "composition") is a process used by plants and other organisms to capture the sun's energy to split off water's hydrogen from oxygen. Hydrogen is combined with carbon dioxide (absorbed from air or water) to form glucose and release oxygen.
We know more than just plants provide photosynthesis; we know that young, fresh growing plants create more oxygen, then older developed plants. So it is the rebirth, the old either burning or providing nourishment to new plant growth, that increases oxygen production. It is the older standing plants that produce less oxygen. Could we not conclude by the “global warmist” reasoning, should we not then burn all old stands of trees and plants, so we can rejuvenate new plants, for more oxygen production?
What’s the one obvious conclusion even the uninitiated can determined. Once this planets ecosystem was totally different than today, and it—by the proof we have—as it had a much higher concentration of oxygen, obviously had a much higher concentration of CO2.
Reality, global warming requires the same imagination as one with the wonder of Walt Disney.
Just when you think we couldn’t get any stranger in this nation’s actions’ they have to prove any reasoning person they’re wrong.
Let’s start this next evaluation with our own constitution: Article 1, section 8--To provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions…
What does this mean? Is it not obvious, that in this nation—our government by design can use military force to prevent insurrection in this nation. Who can forget the proof of this statement? Perhaps there may be those who don’t’ remember the “un-Civil War” but it stands as a silent reminder of the power of this legislation.
In (1819) a supreme court case: McCulloch v. Maryland—invoked the Necessary and Proper Clause of the Constitution: The Congress shall have Power - To make all Laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into Execution the foregoing Powers, and all other Powers vested by this Constitution in the Government of the United States, or in any Department or Officer thereof. Is it any wonder if is called the “Elastic Clause,” for it can be stretched beyond the imagination, and has been. The “Basket Clause” because what could not be included as in the basket? Maybe the “Sweeping Clause” is most appropriate; for if congress can think it, they can act on it. Even Walt Disney’s wildest imagination couldn’t do that.
Here’s the point folks—today our nation is unilaterally sending drones into the “sovereign” air space of “other nations” for the specific purpose of “KILLING” people. Now why aren’t we hearing the “street crowd” of Bush lied, people dies? Is it just when the “cultural communist” of this nation are killing people, remember, premeditated, we have a hit list…that it is OK? Or is the question, it never had anything to do with anything but a propaganda activity, to use it politically to advance the agenda of “cultural communism” in this nation?
If we as a nation have within out governance, as outlined in the constitution, that this nation is authorized by law to put down insurrection—why don’t other countries have the same “sovereign” power? If a nation is putting down the uprising of the “islamist” insurrection, which has occurred in every nation, in every society this dementia has ever been part of—why are they wrong. Do they not have the “right” to preserve their society from this absolute darkness? Where is it written that this nation; or any other nation has the right to intervene in their internal policy? Can we say that the Necessary and Proper clause of this nation’s design allows the intervention in others; especially when those others are recognized nations? Where is the uproar, where is the absolute rejection of these actions, the street demonstrations, the press in an uproar—in caustic rejection of these actions?
As so many don’t know our nation’s history I’ll provide a little antidote to magnify the point. The Whiskey Rebellion, or Whiskey Insurrection, was a tax protest in the United States beginning in 1791, during the presidency of George Washington. Farmers who sold their grain in the form of whiskey had to pay a new tax which they strongly resented. The tax was a part of treasury secretary Alexander Hamilton's program to pay off the national debt.
Now this didn’t come to a physical insurrection, but the army led by George Washington himself, if they would have been attacked and shot at; what do you suppose they would have done? I’ll bet you they would have shot back.
Now in the world of reality, when one shoots at you, you shoot back. In the real world when there is a possibility to be killed, you hit the enemy with the most draconian power you have. The only nation in the history of the world actually “ignorant” enough to send their soldiers into harm’s way, without shelling and destroying the environment of the enemy—and they are the enemy, man, woman, and child—so when a neighborhood shoots at you—your forces level the neighborhood. The actions of Syria, are the acts of what any rational nation would do—nothing more.
Here is another hypothesis. Is it perhaps we have one who thinks he is the Caliph, one who will advance the dementia of islamism and subdue the world. It’s just a hypothesis, think about it and form your own antithesis!
Is this not a fantasy beyond the wildest imagination one can ever imagine?
It’s pretty obvious one could write a book on the insanity on the present condition in this nation. On a daily basis, we have only to read the news, listen to the radio, or watch the TV rendition of political, economic, and political propaganda to be but mesmerized, with such absolute irrational reasoning it is beyond our wildest imagination. Our dreams, unless of course…the hallucinations of drug use…couldn’t conjure any fantasy of such epic proportions. We are at an apex of illogical, irrational, and unbelievable cognitiveness in this nation never experienced before. As such we are no more just the nation of the Unites States—today we could qualify as the United States of “Disneyland.”