Narrowcasting

Published April 24, 2014

by Gary Pearce, Talking About Politics, April 23, 2014.

Watching the Republican Senate debate, it would not have been surprising if all four candidates had sworn that the earth is flat. Because they went right over the edge.

 

You saw four candidates who would pay any price, bear any burden, destroy any branch of government, defend any outlandish right to have a gun and deny any reality in order to pander to a narrow and apparently narrow-minded primary base.

 

The high (or low) point came when the candidates were asked if climate change is real. They greeted the question not only with emphatic “no’s,” but with laughter.

 

Think about that for a minute. No hint that the overwhelming consensus among scientists is that climate change is a real and present danger.

 

Forget scientists. How about the Pentagon? Its 2014 Quadrennial Defense Review says: "The pressures caused by climate change will influence resource competition while placing additional burdens on economies, societies, and governance institutions around the world. These effects are threat multipliers that will aggravate stressors abroad such as poverty, environmental degradation, political instability, and social tensions – conditions that can enable terrorist activity and other forms of violence."

 

Well, who believes those soft-headed, do-good ninnies at the Pentagon?

 

Now, take Thom Tillis (please). He seems to be a smart man. He was a successful business consultant. You don’t do well there by pooh-poohing facts.

 

Tillis surely knows better. But he’s afraid to say so. He would rather pander to a voting base that is trapped in the iron grip of ignorance.

 

Which tells you all you need to know about where the Republican Party is today – and where they would take North Carolina and the nation.

http://www.talkingaboutpolitics.com

Read More NC SPIN >>

April 24, 2014 at 10:26 am
Norm Kellly says:

Gary starts off describing the typical lib/demon politician. I guess the old saying of 'it takes one to know one' is really true, even in the lib mind.

'pay any price' - like when Obama, K, Harry actually REPEATED the lie often that you can keep your insurance policy and/or doctor if you wanted? Like when the entire Obama administration lied to us about the video that caused the riot rather than tell us the truth that we were attacked by islamic radicals? Like claim that Bush was unpatriotic by increasing the deficit while in office to the amount he did, then have the current occupier increase the deficit beyond what even Bush was capable of? Like constantly claiming racism first, even without knowing the facts, furthering the divide between whites and blacks, then having a beer summit after? You mean that kind of pay any price?

'destroy any branch of government' - like when Holder claims that the New Black Panther racist party DIDN'T intimidate white voters by standing at the doors of the voting place? Like when socialized medicine was passed, completely ignoring the Constitution? Like when the current White House occupier changes the law concerning HIS health care plan without congressional approval and CONTRARY to HIS OWN law? Like Fast & Furious, where innocent people were killed and NO ONE in the administration took responsibility, no one was prosecuted, and some of those responsible were actually promoted? You mean like having the federal government used to target the administrations political opponents? This would be the IRS if you are a closed minded, blind lib!

'defend any outlandish right to have a gun'. As opposed to the 'progressives' and socialists, like K, Harry, the White House occupier who insist the Constitution does NOT matter in this case either? My right to own a gun is protected by the US CONSTITUTION! Why is it that libs, including this administration want to IGNORE that part of the Constitution and tell me it doesn't really exist. Like confiscating guns legally owned and carried first and then investigate a specific situation? Libs/socialists/demons are so opposed to private gun ownership it blinds them to ANYTHING else. What are the alternatives to confiscating my gun(s)? How do you get around the Second Amendment to the US Constitution? Not some foreign constitution like libs are prone to do, but to OUR CONSTITUTION? Gary, can you answer this question? Before you berate conservatives for SUPPORTING the Constitution, how about you explain why you ARE SO HELL-BENT on ignoring the Constitution! You first!

Is climate change real? Depends on how the lib asking the question phrased the question. If the question really was 'do you believe in climate change?' then not a single person should have said NO. However, the question was probably asked by a lib and worded with something to do with man-made global warming or man-made global climate change. In this case, laughter first then an honest NO. Climate change is real and historically provable. Man-made climate change is a farce and provably a conspiracy by libs/socialists and people like Algore who look to profit from it and hold down the masses (so the elites like algore can be in power/control).

How do we know libs are telling lies about global climate change/global warming? First, because it's libs saying it! Second, because they use statements like 'the overwhelming consensus among scientists'. Science is NOT about consensus. Science is about repeatability, facts, historical evidence. And the next obvious question should be asked by intelligent, thinking people: is it really an 'overwhelming consensus'? Based on the conversation within the science community, the answer is a resounding NO. It's an overwhelming consensus amongst socialists that global warming is true, but no where else. It's an overwhelming consensus amongst those who stand to profit from man-made global climate change. It's an overwhelming consensus amongst those socialist politicians who choose to reward the companies who can profit from this hoax at the same time that they donate to said socialist politicians. But among thinkers, realists, and fortunately some conservative politicians, the facts still outweigh lib opinion.

So we are to believe the Pentagon? What is their source for facts about global climate change? How do they account for global climate change over the course of the history of the world? Is this current (non-existent) global climate change out of the norm? Or was the most recent warm trend/cool trend the odd-ball characteristic of global climate? Unless we know the source of the Pentagon's input to this report, it has very little meaning. But we must also take into account that many of the people in control at the Pentagon are put there by the current administration. People who probably believe like the current White House occupier. The current occupier has also demonstrated that he is happy to replace those in his administration who do NOT agree with him. He has shown his tendency toward his way or the highway. So the Pentagon's report holds no more weight than Gary's socialist blog posts do.

Let's look at the direction the lib agenda would take us before we dismiss so easily the conservative agenda. More people on government subsistence. More government spending. More government control of our day to day lives. Less 'energy' for the commoners. More expensive energy for those who could continue to afford it. More rules. More regulation. Less independence; more reliance on big brother. Unarmed citizenry. Ever growing debt/deficits. Ignoring basic economic laws for the furthering of socialist agenda. Higher taxes - translated as the commoners allowed to keep less of what they earn. More power & control in Washington so the Constitution has less & less bearing on our lives.

Once again, it seems Gary does an excellent job proving he is a socialist first. No hint as to what's second on his list. For some reason, defending the Constitution, standing up FOR the Constitution is seen as a bad thing. But only by libs/socialists. Just like man-made global climate change.

April 24, 2014 at 7:25 pm
jimmy rouse says:

And when has pandering not been a good thing?

Show me a politician who does not pander and I will show you a former politician.

April 25, 2014 at 12:42 am
Tom Hauck says:

Thank you for an interesting column.

April 25, 2014 at 11:33 am
Scott McKinnon says:

Your article called Narrow Casting revealed a narrow mind on your part. It wasn't funny or accurate, but proves that conjecture is still alive. If the global warming hype is so overwhelming, why are so many scientists not convinced. Let's assume you are right for a moment. Please explain how the United States alone can solve the problem.