Archive for the ‘Axis of Idiots’ Category

Arm yourself with the knowledge that you are being lied to constantly from the media, the Democrats and anyone with a collectivist mindset.
Wake up people.

How To Untangle Orwellian Doublethink: 4 Secrets To Help You Spot BS

Even very smart people can be tricked by some of these terrible techniques…

In order to control millions of people, totalitarian or proto-totalitarian governments find it necessary to somehow prod their subjects into accepting that which is not true. Intelligent people will naturally see the truth and thereby comprehend when government lies to them – and so that’s the rub – how does totalitarian government deal with intelligent people when they must be lied to?

George Orwell provides the answer: intelligent people must be conditioned to reject self-evident truth, to reject the sanity of common sense, to accept the insanity of Orwellian Doublethink, to accept the lie and the truth in their minds simultaneously: “with the lie always one leap ahead of the truth.”

How do Dictatorships lie to intelligent people and get away with it?

1. In the early stages of totalitarianism the use of Orwellian Newspeak is preferred to blatant, in-your-face lies because Newspeak (otherwise known as Doublespeak) is the clever manipulation of words which mean one thing to the speaker and something very different or its opposite to the listener, thus one may plant a false idea into another’s head by lying to them directly, or by using the tricky technique of Doublespeak.

via How To Untangle Orwellian Doublethink: 4 Secrets To Help You Spot BS | PJ Lifestyle.

Good article.
Political correctness liberal stupidity that is swallowed hook, line and sinker at your local university.

Political Correctness: The Progressive Political Strategy

By Norman Rogers

Is there a bigger collection conformist drones than the tenured professorate of American universities? Tenured professors have lifetime guarantees of employment granted for the specific reason of protecting them from retaliation when they speak out on controversial subjects. Yet they are, by and large, terrified of even minor transgressions of progressive orthodoxy, otherwise known as political correctness. Granted, they do have reason to be afraid of stepping over politically correct lines. They won’t be paraded through the campus with a dunce cap while being pelted with rotten eggs, but they can be shunned, tried in a kangaroo court or fired. Universities may have totalitarian impulses, but they don’t have the enforcement tools that real totalitarians have. Harvard doesn’t have a forced labor camp in the forests of Maine. If a small percentage of professors stood up against political correctness it would melt away very quickly.

Political correctness is defined by dictionary.com as “marked by or adhering to a typically progressive orthodoxy on issues involving especially ethnicity, gender, sexual orientation, or ecology.” For example, if you want to be politically correct, you cannot use ethnic or gender stereotypes, or suggest that gay marriage is a bad idea. When Larry Summers, then the president of Harvard University, timidly suggested as a hypothesis to explain the underrepresentation of women at the highest levels of mathematics that women may perform less well in math than men, he was quickly out of a job. Suggesting that men and woman are emotionally or intellectually different is prohibited by political correctness. If a mob of young blacks attack pedestrians, or robs a store, in the politically correct media they become unruly teenagers of no particular race. If you criticize the computer models that predict a global warming disaster you are depicted as an ignorant climate denier.

via Articles: Political Correctness: The Progressive Political Strategy.

In case you missed it, I thought y0u should catch up on the global warming scam.
Happy reading…

 

By Ken Haapala, President, Science and Environmental Policy Project (SEPP)

Assertions and Creditable Evidence: This week, the movie, Merchants of Doubt, was released, which claims that certain scientists were in the pay of tobacco companies, etc. without advancing credible evidence. These scientists had the audacity of challenging that human emissions of greenhouse gases, particularly carbon dioxide, are causing unprecedented and dangerous global warming. Of course, warming has stopped even though emissions continue to increase and atmospheric carbon dioxide (CO2) continues to increase.

The movie is based on a book of the same name by Oreskes and Conway, which offers no credible evidence showing that the four scientists, including SEPP Chairman, Fred Singer, were paid by tobacco companies.

Without a causal mechanism, establishing that inhaling hot cigarette smoke was the primary cause of lung cancer was a difficult, statistically debatable process. Initially, many possible causes were considered, including replacing dirt roads with asphalted roads. The work by Sir Bradford Hill, and others, is laudatory.
There is no question that tobacco companies used unscrupulous means to attack the credibility of the researchers. This is well documented. Today’s issue centers on claims that anyone who questions the rigor of the statistical work supporting a politically popular cause must be using similar methods as the tobacco companies did – guilt by association. Fred Singer, who does not smoke, had the audacity of questioning the claim that second-hand smoke causes cancer. The claim is extremely weak, and far below any standard statistical threshold. For this, he was attacked in both the movie and the book as receiving money from tobacco companies, without any credible evidence supporting the claim.

These efforts illustrate how politically motivated persons will label those, who criticize the lack of rigorous science supporting a politically popular cause, as anti-science, or as paid by third parties. That scientists, and once highly-regarded scientific institutions, join this effort demonstrates the general lowering of standards of acceptable scientific rigor.

Fred Singer has challenged the producer of the movie for evidence. Ken Haapala is asking those who give it positive reviews to please provide credible evidence supporting claims that Singer were financially supported by tobacco companies. Of course, there is none. In fact, during his 25-year service as president of SEPP he received no salary or fee income whatsoever. Further, SEPP does not solicit support from corporations or government.

There may be a silver lining in the release of the movie. It comes at a time of increasing popularity of courtroom drama and crime shows. These are educating the viewing public that hearsay and rumor are not credible evidence. Some members of the public may begin to question the claims in the book and the movie that fail to produce credible evidence as hearsay and rumor. Who knows, they may begin to ask the same question about claims that human emissions of carbon dioxide are causing dangerous global warming? See links under Communicating Better to the Public – Dream Evidence Up.

You can read the rest here:

http://www.sepp.org/twtwfiles/2015/TWTW%203-7-15.pdf

 

And since we’re ignoring everything around the world except Ebola, this is happening…

North Korea now has the ability to produce a miniaturized nuclear warhead that can be mounted atop a ballistic missile.

That is the assessment of Gen. Curtis M. Scaparrotti, the senior U.S. commander on the Korean Peninsula, as he talked to reporters Friday. Scaparrotti also concluded that Pyongyang has a functioning long-range mobile missile launcher.

Although North Korea has conducted three nuclear explosion tests and several medium-and long-range missile test firings, it had not been known whether the regime had developed a nuclear warhead sufficiently small to fit on top of a missile with the range to reach the continental United States.

“Personally I think that they certainly have had the expertise in the past. They’ve had the right connections [with Iran and Pakistan],” commented Scaparrotti, “and so I believe have the capability to have miniaturized a [nuclear] device at this point, and they have the technology to potentially actually deliver what they say they have [and] I think they have a launcher that will carry it at this point.”

via US General: North Korea Now Has Nuclear Warheads for Missiles.

…crying about a minimum wage increase.

First the morons protesting for more money.

And a lesson to the masses.

…Gutting the First Amendment

What will it take to wake Americans up to the fact that the idiots in the Senate are trying to take away their freedoms just as fast as they can get away with it.

It’s high time that Harry Reid is sent packing back to his little whore house in Searchlight, NV.

When the Senate reconvenes today, the No.1 legislative priority of Democrats is to pass a resolution that would gut the First Amendment, one of the few times in American history an amendment has been proposed to cut back on part of the Bill of Rights.

It’s probably no surprise they want to restrict political speech that could threaten their incumbency, but it is a bit ironic coming just a little more than one week before Constitution Day on Sept. 17.

So, the Senate and the House of Representatives return from a month-long recess and, with everything happening in the world at the moment, the legislative schedule set by Sen. Harry Reid, D-Nev., for Sept. 8, available here on the website of the “Democrats in the U.S. Senate,” includes consideration of a few nominations but lists only one legislative item: a motion to invoke cloture end debate on S.J.Res. 19.

This resolution, sponsored by Sen. Tom Udall, D-N.M., and 47 other senators (without a single Republican member), would amend the First Amendment to give Congress the power to limit fundraising and spending on political speech and political activity. The relevant language says that “Congress and the States may regulate and set reasonable limits on the raising and spending of money by candidates and others to influence elections.”

via Senate Democrats No. 1 Priority After the Recess?.

Bill at his finest.