Obama’s Climate Swan Song: “Without Some Common Baseline of Facts … We’ll Keep Talking Past Each Other”

Image: http://www.sundiatapost.com

Thank you, Obomber, for fucking over “we the people” and the rest of humanity, you low-life liar and hypocrite! Good riddance, you elite ass-kisser, you “step-n-fetch-it” stooge, don’t let the door hit you in your corporate-capitalist ass on the way out!

“…I would take President Obama’s appeal for more inclusiveness more seriously if he wasn’t such a hypocrite when it comes to applying the principles he claims to value. When President Obama talks about “a common baseline of facts”, he means his own view of the world.

Obama’s climate lackeys over the years have repeatedly point blank refused to engage with people [who] dispute their version of the facts…”

Obama’s Climate Swan Song: “without some common baseline of facts … we’ll keep talking past each other”

Guest essay by Eric Worrall

President Obama has found time in his farewell speech to accuse opponents of his climate policies of not caring about science.

So regardless of the station we occupy; we have to try harder; to start with the premise that each of our fellow citizens loves this country just as much as we do; that they value hard work and family like we do; that their children are just as curious and hopeful and worthy of love as our own.

None of this is easy. For too many of us, it’s become safer to retreat into our own bubbles, whether in our neighborhoods or college campuses or places of worship or our social media feeds, surrounded by people who look like us and share the same political outlook and never challenge our assumptions. The rise of naked partisanship, increasing economic and regional stratification, the splintering of our media into a channel for every taste – all this makes this great sorting seem natural, even inevitable. And increasingly, we become so secure in our bubbles that we accept only information, whether true or not, that fits our opinions, instead of basing our opinions on the evidence that’s out there.

This trend represents a third threat to our democracy. Politics is a battle of ideas; in the course of a healthy debate, we’ll prioritize different goals, and the different means of reaching them. But without some common baseline of facts; without a willingness to admit new information, and concede that your opponent is making a fair point, and that science and reason matter, we’ll keep talking past each other, making common ground and compromise impossible.

Isn’t that part of what makes politics so dispiriting? How can elected officials rage about deficits when we propose to spend money on preschool for kids, but not when we’re cutting taxes for corporations? How do we excuse ethical lapses in our own party, but pounce when the other party does the same thing? It’s not just dishonest, this selective sorting of the facts; it’s self-defeating. Because as my mother used to tell me, reality has a way of catching up with you.

Take the challenge of climate change. In just eight years, we’ve halved our dependence on foreign oil, doubled our renewable energy, and led the world to an agreement that has the promise to save this planet. But without bolder action, our children won’t have time to debate the existence of climate change; they’ll be busy dealing with its effects: environmental disasters, economic disruptions, and waves of climate refugees seeking sanctuary.

Now, we can and should argue about the best approach to the problem. But to simply deny the problem not only betrays future generations; it betrays the essential spirit of innovation and practical problem-solving that guided our Founders.

Read more: http://www.latimes.com/politics/la-pol-obama-farewell-speech-transcript-20170110-story.html

I would take President Obama’s appeal for more inclusiveness more seriously if he wasn’t such a hypocrite when it comes to applying the principles he claims to value. When President Obama talks about “a common baseline of facts”, he means his own view of the world.

Obama’s climate lackeys over the years have repeatedly point blank refused to engage with people [who] dispute their version of the facts. Take the following interview, in which NASA’s Gavin Schmidt refused to even sit in the same room as renowned climate skeptic Dr. Roy Spencer, because he didn’t want to talk to a scientist whose interpretation of the evidence differed from his own.

{Sojourner note: this NASA stooge, more than all the evidence to the contrary, proves to me that “AGW” is nothing but an elite-concocted, bald-faced lie, which has been designed to help rid the world of up to 90% of humanity (Agenda 21/2030/Depopulation/NWO). Otherwise, if these panderers of “anthropogenic global warming”, these sold out stooges of the elite-swine, were so certain of their so-called “settled science”, they would be more than willing to confront those who question “AGW”. But instead, these sold-out frauds run away, like the cowards they are, every time a legitimate scientist attempts to engage them in debate. A liar never wants to be confronted with his lie!}

If Gavin Schmidt’s behaviour isn’t an example of “talking past” an opponent, I would like to know what is. Roy Spencer would have been happy to engage with Gavin Schmidt, it was NASA’s Gavin Schmidt who refused to engage with Roy Spencer.

President Obama never to my knowledge criticised this lack of engagement by politically favoured climate scientists. As far as I know President Obama has never sought advice from climate scientists who wanted to say things which Obama didn’t want to hear.

President Obama in my opinion only wants his opponents to acknowledge other points of view, because he is no longer in the driving seat.

President-elect Trump does listen to people whose viewpoints differ from his own – which is why Trump will be a far better President than Obama was.

{Sojourner note: I am more than doubtful about Trump being better than any of the assholes who have preceded him!}

Source: Obama’s Climate Swan Song: “without some common baseline of facts … we’ll keep talking past each other” | Watts Up With That?

P.S.

Here’s more on this “tattle-tale Gray” asshole’s legacy of corruption, lies, war, torture and genocide:

U.S. Dropped 26,171 Bombs in 2016. What a Bloody End to Obama’s Reign

…Most Americans would probably be astounded to realize that the president who has been painted by Washington pundits as a reluctant warrior has actually been a hawk. The Iran nuclear deal, a herculean achievement, and the opening of diplomatic relations with Cuba unfortunately stand alone as President Obama’s successful uses of diplomacy over hostility.

While candidate Obama came to office pledging to end George W Bush’s wars, he leaves office having been at war longer than any president in US history. He is also the only president to serve two complete terms with the nation at war.

President Obama did reduce the number of US soldiers fighting in Afghanistan and Iraq, but he dramatically expanded the air wars and the use of special operations forces around the globe. In 2016, US special operators could be found in 70% of the world’s nations, 138 countries – a staggering jump of 130% since the days of the Bush administration.

Looking back at President Obama’s legacy, the Council on Foreign Relation’s Micah Zenko added up the defense department’s data on airstrikes and made a startling revelation: in 2016 alone, the Obama administration dropped at least 26,171 bombs. This means that every day last year, the US military blasted combatants or civilians overseas with 72 bombs; that’s three bombs every hour, 24 hours a day.

While most of these air attacks were in Syria and Iraq, US bombs also rained down on people in Afghanistan, Libya, Yemen, Somalia and Pakistan. That’s seven majority-Muslim countries.

One bombing technique that President Obama championed is drone strikes. As drone-warrior-in-chief, he spread the use of drones outside the declared battlefields of Afghanistan and Iraq, mainly to Pakistan and Yemen. Obama authorized over 10 times more drone strikes than George W Bush, and automatically painted all males of military age in these regions as combatants, making them fair game for remote controlled killing…

Read More Here:

http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/46188.htm

Advertisements

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s