This is why Islamic radicalism spreads so easily: liberal “intelligentsia” are constantly minimizing the danger, and, again, I’m not sure why, when everything the Islamists want is in direct opposition to what Liberals want. Anyway, here’s Excitable Paul Krugman, who lives a nice 1%er life in a McMansion well away from the areas that Islamists would attack
….
So what was Friday’s attack about? Killing random people in restaurants and at concerts is a strategy that reflects its perpetrators’ fundamental weakness. It isn’t going to establish a caliphate in Paris. What it can do, however, is inspire fear — which is why we call it terrorism, and shouldn’t dignify it with the name of war.
The point is not to minimize the horror. It is, instead, to emphasize that the biggest danger terrorism poses to our society comes not from the direct harm inflicted, but from the wrong-headed responses it can inspire. And it’s crucial to realize that there are multiple ways the response can go wrong.
You can certainly see the Leftist idiocy in those two paragraphs, but, I have thrown them in as highlights leading up to this
Finally, terrorism is just one of many dangers in the world, and shouldn’t be allowed to divert our attention from other issues. Sorry, conservatives: when President Obama describes climate change as the greatest threat we face, he’s exactly right. Terrorism can’t and won’t destroy our civilization, but global warming could and might.
See? All these Islamic jihadis and their attempts to sow fear (and, really, they are just the violent arm of the Islamist movement. It’s really the non-violent ones, who use our laws and societal mores against us that are the bigger danger) are just tiny things when it comes to Hotcoldwetdry!
So much so that Warmists will run all over the nation and world putting out vast amounts of carbon pollution.
President skinny black guy and that Krugman dork (our betters-so to speak), will tell us to just accept that terrorist attacks will happen from time to time but it’s really nothing to get worked up about.
Wouldn’t want to upset our muslim friends by fighting back, now would we?
“I don’t think I’ve shown, uh……….hesitation.”
-President skinny black guy
He actually said that earlier today.
Well, of course they’re right. That Jordanian pilot that Da’ish burned to death? Why, he died of global warming! The prisoners they drowned in cages? That was the result of rising sea levels!
“Stereotypes of Islam are ‘counterproductive’ and ‘wrong.'”
-President skinny black guy at G20 summit
“They cling to their guns and religion…”
– skinny black guy 2007
“Global warming could and might..” “Could” and “might” are weasel words- classic rhetorical tricks to hide the fact that science isn’t on their side.
“Could” and “might” are words used by honest writers to express uncertainty; imprecise yes, weasel words, no.
In fact, the science is on the side of the “warmists”. There is no science to support the Deniers.
The Earth is warming from CO2 emissions we are generating.
“Could” and “might” are like “rapidly” and “whopping”.
Weasley and misleading.
There is no money for liberals in fighing ISIS, now cornering carbon credits like ALGORE did…now you are talking and that is worth fighting for.
“Could and might are used by honest writers to express uncertainty.” Yes, as I said-uncertainty about CO2, uncertainty of the cause and effect. When people say “the science is settled”, then hedge their bets by saying “might, “could”, “may”, ect., then they’re weasel words.
jeff,
Actually the science is on the side of what you call the deniers, whatever that is. If you are referring to the fact that we don’t acknowledge the fact that the earth is warming, well maybe, I will acknowledge that when you show the temps, not the ones that are manufactured. I will agree with you when the 90 scientist provide raw information and not a series of stupid, manufactured grafts. Now, as to a minor rise in CO2 doing anything, we go back to my parallel on cholesterol. It doesn’t exist. What you have to do is explain the ice ages, the warming periods, and how there really is no correlation of CO2 with anything, just like cholesterol and disease. Then there is the issue of solving the problem and you have to explain how total elimination of our economy and government will do anything, especially when your religion clearly says it want but is still necessary.
dave,
There is no doubt that the Earth is warming, although there is Denial.
The raw data and all the methods are available.
The atmospheric concentration of CO2 has increased from 280 ppm to 400 ppm and is still rising. This is the highest concentration for at least 500,000 years. That CO2 absorbs infrared radiation, the greenhouse effect, has been understood for at least a century.
You keep making a claim that CO2 is like cholesterol but you have refused to explain what you mean.
Reducing CO2 emissions does not require the “total elimination of our economy and government”.
Global warming is a fact not a religion.
Reducing CO2 emissions will slow warming.
The Earth has gone though warming and cooling cycles since its beginning – how do we know this isn’t normal. No one alive was here during the last major climate shift. I hope if we are doing anything it is toward the warming side: You cannot seed a field covered in ice.
You should pray that it is warming, we are due a shift.