Is this finally the ‘One World Government’ that so many conspiracy theorists have banged on about?

Well, probably not…but it does add some nice flammable fuel to the theory.

Gary Stix has come out stating that articles that were written on climate change 6 years ago on how to reduce carbon emissions were a mistake, what they should have been writing about was how to control us

If I had it to do over, I’d approach the issue planning differently, my fellow editors permitting. I would scale back on the nuclear fusion and clean coal, instead devoting at least half of the available space for feature articles on psychology, sociology, economics and political science. Since doing that issue, I’ve come to the conclusion that the technical details are the easy part. It’s the social engineering that’s the killer. Moon shots and Manhattan Projects are child’s play compared to needed changes in the way we behave.

Riiiight, trying to set in place ways to modify our behaviour…rather than giving is the facts to disseminate for ourselves.

An article came out last week stating

“Human societies must now change course and steer away from critical tipping points in the Earth system that might lead to rapid and irreversible change. This requires fundamental reorientation and restructuring of national and international institutions toward more effective Earth system governance and planetary stewardship.”

This article was “authored by several dozen scientists”

To be effective, a new set of institutions would have to be imbued with heavy-handed, transnational enforcement powers. There would have to be consideration of some way of embracing head-in-the-cloud answers to social problems that are usually dismissed by policymakers as academic naivete.

Heavy handed, transnational power! Did you see that part? What it’s saying is that this new ‘institution’ needs absolute power to bully policy makers into doing what they are told.

I have always thought that there has never been a good solid argument put before me, to convince me of a OWG…but this scientific opinion piece demonstrates how some can think it’s an inevitability.

Rick Santorum and the ‘All Gay Cruise’…the epitome of irony

Rick Santorum was in Puerto Rico over the weekend campaigning to win some of the 20 delegates there on his way to coming second in the GOP race.

He had a chance to take some time out so took an hour by the pool to relax when this photo was taken of him.

It has been reported that the snap was taken by a patron on an ‘all gay cruise.’

So why is there irony here?

Well if you don’t know, firstly I must warn you that if you are of a sensitive nature then you won’t to know so stop reading now, anyways you may have read a post I did a wee while back saying that no GOP nominee would beat Obama this year, in that post I said of Santorum.

the problem is his name…well maybe not his name…but what his name means

See in 2003 Rick Santorum championed a bill to make sodomy illegal which put him offside with the LGBT community.  One activist within the community, Dan Savage, who had previously been responsible for coining new definitions for words with a sexual reference, challenged Santorum on his campaign and threatened to have his surname defined online by something negative if he didn’t withdraw what Savage saw as homophobic laws.

Santorum declined to back down and the now famous surname was re-defined to mean…well that’s where you can go find the meaning independently if you like…and now the LBGT community are trying to reinvigorate the meaning.

6 months ago if you Googled ‘Santorum’ it was the second result on the page, now it’s dropped off the front page but still comes up in Rick Santorum’s Wikipedia pages which is the top result.

Rick Santorum is still a top target for the LGBT community, and to have him turn up in the middle of a resort hosting a ‘gay only cruise’ is nothing but the height of irony.

What the gay community has started doing in America to candidates whose positions they find offensive is ‘glitter bomb’ them…which is a sit sounds having glitter dumped over you…I guess it’s better than a lamington ah Mayor Len Brown?


Ideology versus intelligent debate

It’s been fascinating to watch the small (let’s be honest…very small) ripple of the Cameron Slater/Helen Kelly post I wrote yesterday and I’ve be really interested in how people have pigeon holed me and cast aspersions on my character and decided what kind of person I am.

I think it’s a case of ideology versus intelligent debate.

If you are an ideologue, I think the chances of reasoned debate is diminished as all you can see is the conversation from your side…now that makes sense but any intelligent person will tell you that ‘your side’ is not always going to be right…logic dictates that sometimes it will be in the wrong. Therefore if you support ‘your side’ 100%, you are sometimes supporting the side who is wrong.

Let me take a step backwards.

I have written several posts about Union issues in the past couple of years, sometimes supporting them as in the NZEI case for National Standards (so much so that the NZEI put my post on their website for others to read) and sometimes not supportive of them as in the Ports dispute right now. After the NZEI post I was called a ‘Socialist’, ‘a leftie loon’ and ‘the mouth piece of Helen Clarke’, after the Ports piece I have been called a…well lets have a look at that.

On Kiwiblog in and amongst the comments here are some thoughts…apparently I am “not the brightest light on the Xmas tree” or thoughts that maybe I was “dishonest”. I also started my last post with a statement of not being anti-union, that has been compared to someone saying “I am not racist…but I hate Maori”

So far my favourite response has come from one time colleague Martyn ‘Bomber’ Bradbury. You see I am a microscopic fish in the world of blogging so sometimes when I write a post I also send an email to some ‘colleagues’ to let them know what I have just posted about. It’s kind of like prostituting myself looking for more hits as a pay off. I did this last night after my most recent post and got these responses from Martyn via email.

actually after reading this, I defriended you from Facebook, having an opinion is one thing Pat, being cameron slaters bitch is another thing. What a load of anti-union hysterical bullshit. You are well on your way to being a rednecked talkback host. Congratulations.

Followed 60 seconds later by this one.

when you do evil Pat, people tend to notice. Giving slater time after he’s being paid by PoA is pretty dirty though isn’t it?

I email him to wish him well for the future seeing as we were no longer ‘friends’ and may have just mentioned that it was a shame that the week before when we asked him to come on and put his perspective to one of these issues he wouldn’t respond to us to which he again responded.

I would have zero interest in being on right wing christian radio Patty and my advice to the Union movement would be to bypass it as well.

Again followed 60 seconds later by this one.

Oh and btw – stop sending me this unsolicited right wing Christian crap.

When I supported Martyn over his fallout with Radio NZ he was happy to receive my ‘crap’, when I wrote the piece about the NZEI he was happy to receive my ‘crap’, when he saw me on TVNZ talking politics he was happy to send me ‘crap’ congratulating me on the show and when he heard me on ZB and facebooked me congratulating me on my content one can only assume he was happy to allow my ‘crap’ to flow in his ears…but not now. Not now that my latest ‘crap’ doesn’t all of a sudden fit with his ideological narrative…now we cannot be FB friends

I don’t mean to pick on Bomber in this, I like him, always have, still do and probably always will, my wife knows him a little bit from University days and she likes him too but it’s a good example of how ideology gets in the way of intelligent debate, I am not anti-union…I am anti how this union is handling this one industrial action, period.

Today on my talkback show I stood up for the PSA…wait for it…a union. I back them in their claims that John Key has broken his promise about job losses. I agree, he is in the wrong and I support them in that. I support the Rest Home Workers Union…you guys should be getting paid ten times what you are for the work you do.

But an ideologue cannot see the wood for the trees, an ideologue cannot reason that an intelligent person can look at an issue and make an independent assessment of that issue…which may, or may not be parallel to whom they supported last time and I think this is what gets debate de-railed 90% of the time in NZ as it’s the ideologues who write the blogs, who comment on the radio, who write the speeches, who tell you what to think.

I like ’em all, I have no beef with anyone of them, it just saddens me that those of us that you could justifiably call centrist are not the ones pulling the big audiences on air, in print, or on telly as we are not controversial enough…until we disagree with an ideologue.

UPDATE: A response from WhaleOil to Bombers emails

Pat, a point of clarification. I know you didn’t say it but Bomber has done so.

I am not, nor have ever been paid by POAL or anyone associated with them in any manner, either in kind or in cash for my posts about the Ports dispute.

I have simply verified and reported facts as they came to light. I in no way hold you responsible for Martyn Bradbury’s defamation. I certainly do not wish you to take it down.

I want people to see it, together with my outright rejection of his lies.

My apologies to Cameron to not have already putting some kind of disclaimer in amongst Bombers email