What is Woke? What is Equity? I can tell you for certain that neither of those terms includes the traditional American ideals of meritocracy, equality before the Law, and equal opportunity—YOU get to decide how far in Life you can go and what you can achieve. Woke and Equity are Marxist foundational concepts that are antithetical to our norms.

And while Equity has a lot of nuance beyond what one might think in coming across “equity” for the first time, it’s a head fake. Quick – equality and equity – the same?  Nope, not at all. But that’s EXACTLY the Left’s intent. That you won’t even bother to think, “What, there’s a difference? Aren’t they the same”? If you DON’T think, they win. And, if it has to be said, they’ve wrapped a bunch of other words around it to support THEIR definitions so as to get you to ingrain THEIR concepts with THEIR verbiage so as to dislodge YOUR beliefs without you knowing it.

Is this the end-all be-all discussion of this issue? Absolutely not – while I know some, James Lindsay is the expert. We’ve covered Lindsay before. What I’m trying to do here is go from his short form to his long-form on the topic.

Let’s get started with the short coverage by Dave Rubin at Blaze Media (Reformatted, emphasis mine):

Ever wondered where the word ‘equity’ comes from? Well, here’s your answer. The left loves nothing more than to throw the word “equity” around, especially when addressing the ever-growing list of alleged inequalities in our society. But where does the word equity actually come from? American author James Lindsay — who Dave Rubin calls one of the best explainers of “the connection between [woke ideology] and Marxism” — told the European Parliament about the history of the word:

So, here’s the definition of equity, and see if it sounds like a definition of anything else you’ve ever heard of.  The definition of equity comes from the Public Administration Literature. It was written by a man named George Frederickson, and the definition is:

an administered political economy in which shares are adjusted so that citizens are made equal.

Does that sound like anything you’ve heard of before? Like socialism? They are going to administer an economy to make shares equal. The only difference between equity and socialism is the type of property that they redistribute;  the type of shares. They’re going to redistribute social and cultural capital in addition to economic and material capital.

And so this is my thesis when we say, ‘What is woke?’: Woke is Maoism with American characteristics.

Ok, so the idea is that Marxism was really an economic way of redistributing everything that “everyone would be equal. But “everyone’s not equal. There’s always the layer [of people] that has all of the stuff, and everyone else gets sort of nothing, and that creates ‘equity’ amongst the people.

The reason why I wanted you to see that clip is because now what we have seen out of the Democrats is not only that want to redistribute money” — we’ll take from them and give to them and giant government programs that create the cycles of poverty and all that. But they want redistribution when it comes to health. They want redistribution to virtually every part of your life, that they want equity at the end. So we want health equity, we want education equity, all of these things but you’re going to have to kill a lot of people to accomplish all of that.

We’ve already seen that in the Biden Administration by installing race quotas or priorities in different areas. Remember when Gov Sununu started the prioritization of COVID vaccine shots for Blacks over others?  In fealty to Critical Race Theory, resources will not be earned but “managed,” and that management, in no small measure, will be in terms of your membership in a given DEI group as determined by “them.” We see schools that are dumbing down their curriculum as they know that certain “marginalized groups” (as a cover) aren’t achieving at the same student achievement levels as Whites and Asians, so they are getting rid of Advanced Placement Classes and erasing the idea of (and I’m dating myself here) Basic, Standard, Honors, and Advanced classes that stress academic rigor and the pace of coverage of materials (e.g., math, history, physics, English, et al).

Here as well (this sophomore Engineering student should be an an SJW concentration instead). Equity once again rears its ugly visage:

A second-year engineering student at Princeton University recently argued that since everyone’s high school experience is not the same, the Ivy must implement “equity-oriented solutions” to correct the situation. Yushra Guffer’s Daily Princetonian op-ed opens by stating an obvious truth: “[W]hile the University’s high standards of excellence and fast-paced environment may be valid goals to strive for, not all students are able to keep up with the pace.”

If you can’t keep up but demand that others “give you” an equal outcome, that should instantly be a message that you aren’t cut out to be an engineer. But this mid-wit can’t cast off her SJW outlook.

But her solution isn’t that students should buckle down and work harder if they want to continue with an Ivy League science-centered education. No, Princeton must accommodate those who can’t hack it.

The author has it exactly right – the newest generation has been so pampered and coddled that they EXPECT everyone to cater to their needs, thoughts, and whims.

“Princeton needs to re-evaluate the difficulty of the STEM introductory courses and implement equity-oriented solutions that directly address the different levels of student preparation,” Guffer writes. “After all, the level of academic rigor at Princeton can only be truly effective if all students are first able to work on a level playing field.”

And there you go – everyone MUST be evaluated and assumed to be at the same level – no matter how low that must be. So, you want this Engineering class to be designing your next plane?

Equity – everyone must be equal. That includes, for our kids anyway, making them all stupid at the same level. They are erasing meritocracy; they are erasing ability; they are erasing motivation, persistence, and everything else that makes us what our Declaration of Independence says is true:

…that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.–That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed…

All of that adds up to Individuals having a Government—these American Maoists are attempting, like the Regressives before them, to reinstitute Rulers from the top so that we would be mere subjects and serfs. This is their process of recreating Feudalism (as in “a rose by any other name is still a rose”).

Here is another Lindsay intro to this topic:



And a long form intensive dive into it:



And remember, the MAIN idea of Communism is this: from “The Squatters’ Rights Concept Is a Marxist Attack on Property Rights.”

“The theory of the Communists may be summed up in the single sentence: Abolition of private property.” – Manifesto of the Communist Party

And the modern version of this, thanks to “the Davos People”?

You will own nothing but be happy.  Steve summarizes that up wonderfully:

The post Woke is Maoism with American Characteristics” appeared first on Granite Grok.

One of the many questions following Joe Biden’s “poor” performance in the presidential debate has been with whom the Democrats shall replace him. Or how about, who is fighting to keep Biden in the race, what donors are doing, what the base thinks (will this fracture the party or get independents off the fence), and, most importantly, who is playing as Chief Executive?

It is not Joe.

They are probably going through the motions, but someone in the West Wing is making decisions and convincing our sockpuppet president that whatever IT is, is the right thing to do. Rule by committee. A positional oligarchy undermining Democracy (admit it, Dems, that’s what this is). The guy you claim to have elected isn’t the guy running the joint, which, arguably, you could use as an excuse to claim he isn’t responsible for the shit we’re in. But someone is. Democrat someone’s or their appointees.

There’s really no escape from the Sock Puppet Presidency. Either Joe did it, or the people who picked to “advise” him did.

And who among us is surprised? Joe’s entire career has been as a placeholder. He’s a gaffe machine and always has been. Joe is a serial liar and plagiarist who hung out with career racists. He’s not an inspiring speaker or commanding presence and never was, and he didn’t get more votes than Obama. But the elites led by the Dem party picked him as the most likely not-Trump guy (talk about a sign of intellectual and political weakness), installed him, and told us it was for unity, the good of the people, the nation, and the safety and security of the world.

None of that was true, and none of it happened. We got the opposite, and we got it hard and fast.

Joe Biden, like COVID, was a bunch of Bureaucrats hiding the truth for as long as possible without any regard for the damage done, only admitting to anything suspicious when the truth had become so impossible to ignore that prevarication in service to limiting one’s complicity is only overshadowed by the deafening silence of many who were all in on mandates, passports, and censorship and would rather if we just forgot their part and just moved along.

Post-COVID watercooler etiquette has transitioned to a point where you’d be safer talking about abortion.

And the Left was fine with treating Biden’s decline like that until the first Presidential Debate of the 2024 season when the rhetorical red-headed stepchild didn’t just come out of the basement; he danced a gig on the national dinner table. The secrets are out. There’s no putting this demented genie back in the bottle, and the Democrat response proves it.

The only thing holding them back from change even they can believe in is Tribe Biden and whichever other treasonous actors have been undermining democracy for the past three-plus years with their hand up our sock puppet president. A multi-layered problem for the so-called defenders of democracy. To fix it, they have to uninstall the guy they put there. This requires them to ignore the base that voted for him in the 2024 Democratic primaries (including the complicit dopes in New Hampshire who wrote his name on a ballot on which he did not even appear).

Bernie Sanders has to be laughing his ass off, having been denied Democracy twice by the same lot. Elites will once again be asked to name a successor by any means necessary and drag them across a finish line that will keep moving until January 20th, 2025.

And the only ones who can conceivably stop them are Americans who may have voted for Joe Biden (or at least against Trump) and who choose not to be fooled again in numbers so significant that trying to game the results would be too blatant even for the American ruling class to dare.

And still, I suspect they will. They can’t do it with Joe Biden, and that has them out of whatever passes for their minds.

The post The Sock Puppet Presidency appeared first on Granite Grok.

Leaf-eating, beta-male Rep Heath Howard (Democrat – Strafford/Barrington) believes that the founding principle of America was “we did not want a king.” This beta male has either never read the Declaration of Independence or is rewriting it.

The Declaration says that we people have a natural right to overthrow ANY FORM OF GOVERNMENT that no longer serves the purpose of government, which is to preserve our natural rights.

What the Declaration actually says:

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.–That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, –That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government,

The post Has Democrat-Beta-Rep Heath Howard Even Read The Declaration of Independence? appeared first on Granite Grok.

Libraries in Utah are responding to a new law that would fine staff for allowing kids to access inappropriate material by banning children. “Legislation passed by conservative lawmakers allows parents to sue libraries for books they deem obscene or otherwise inappropriate.” Rather than remove any inappropriate content, they are banning children instead.

Here’s the Library line.

Public and school libraries had 60 days to remove the book or move it to an adults-only area closely monitored by staff, or face lawsuits from parents.

However, many libraries were too small to create a special section, or lacked the resources or appetite for risk, and instead banned kids entirely.

A sign in the Idaho Falls Public Library, with a huge stop symbol, informed patrons they would need to show photo ID if they were under 30.

Children could only enter if they had an unrestricted library card signifying their parents were happy with them browsing alone, or be accompanied by a parent who ‘must sign an affidavit every time you come to the library’.

The sign sparked outrage online, and many critics contrasted it with abortions being banned under almost all circumstances, including rape and incest.

I have not read the law, which may be too subjective, but I sense this is a familiar problem we’ve covered. Every library has a fixed footprint not unlimited shelf space. They cannot have every book. Smaller libraries, even more so. But in each instance, someone decides what books will be available in print. They choose them, buy them, and shelve them, so these gatekeepers, if we play by Progressive rules, are banning books. Whether the library staff, its board, or trustees, someone assigns a value judgment for the community and includes or excludes titles.

In smaller libraries, this is amplified.

Library officials acknowledged the policy would affect homeschooled children in a ‘dramatic’ way but said it was necessary to protect staff, the library, and taxpayers’ funds.

According to Rep. Megan Egbert, keeping libraries like Donnelly open would be impossible if adult-only sections could not be fully monitored.

How did they do it before the sexually explicit material directed at children became a necessary part of any collections?

Maybe these towns need to replace staff with those who prioritize the library’s value to children over an ideological obsession with grooming that is dangerous to them. Or perhaps it is time to ban the library culture that allows this abuse to continue and invest those resources in internet access. It’s not as if we even need partisan child-banning librarians – and think how much better losing that carbon footprint would be for the environment.

Whatever you do, don’t let the Feds fund your broadband infrastructure expansions. They spend billions, but no one who needs it ever seems to get connected.

The post Libraries Ban Children so They Can Keep the Naughty Books appeared first on Granite Grok.

The left made it clear that anyone could claim to be anything they wanted! You made these rules—we’re just following them.

Remember what Saul said:

RULE 4: “Make the enemy live up to its own book of rules.” If the rule is that every letter gets a reply, send 30,000 letters. You can kill them with this because no one can possibly obey all of their own rules. (This is a serious rule. The besieged entity’s very credibility and reputation is at stake, because if activists catch it lying or not living up to its commitments, they can continue to chip away at the damage.).

Again, the Left has said we can be whatever we want to be (except their code phrase is “what I identify as,” which is REALLY meant to shut down any conversations they don’t want to happen).  This kid gives these self-important “fatphilic-body positives” a Master Class in language and Social Justice (and turns it against them):

This video is entertaining, and it tends to confirm what we have long suspected about the sincerity of those who purport to believe in “identifying.” I think a lot of people on the left are happy to dismiss reality until they are dealing with something that matters to them. Enjoy:

Give this guy a medal! pic.twitter.com/6FArsDSLZY

— Libs of TikTok (@libsoftiktok) March 31, 2024

“Fat-bodied People”…hilarious!

Yep, he learned their Rule and proclaimed it for himself. Or is that to play along as “he/they”? “They”?

Well played.

The post What Did You Expect, Lefties, as YOU Made It Clear That ANYONE Can Claim to Be Anything They Want! appeared first on Granite Grok.

It is open season on BidenX after a radio host who “interviewed” him two days ago leaked to CNN that the entire interview was a sham.

As some of us have said repeatedly, this has been going on since 2020. Yeah, it has gotten worse, but the real “news” is that you do NOT get news from the corporate media. You get Party (as in Democrat Party) propaganda. But … go, Free Press!

The post Night Cap: Biden’s Post-Debate “Interview” Was Scripted appeared first on Granite Grok.

Lloyd Alter at Carbon Upfront (heh! The “new” Treehugger”) is NOT a fan of the “Gigacasting” method that is overtaking the auto industry led by Tesla. That manufacturing technique involves high-pressure form/mold pressing of larger and larger parts for Teslas instead of press stamping lots of little pieces and then having to weld, rivet, or screw them all together.

Not only does it eliminate a lot of inventory of those parts, but it also lessens the number of steps in the manufacturing process and the hourly costs of many line workers who would be needed to do it.

The result is a much lower cost of manufacturing. Lloyd’s lament, however, is that it makes it harder and much costlier for someone to fix stuff that goes wrong.

I have to admit that when the entire gigacasted underside of a car is bent, even if only slightly after a fender-bender, the cost to repair is not just a few small pieces but most of a car’s cost. A dd in the cost of the battery bank (since we’re talking EVs) and it may well be totaled.

Like the Japanese cars coming over to the US starting in the 1950s and 1960s, EVs just happen to be getting that same bad rap – quality is cruddy, especially when compared to their gas-driven brethren.  EVs are giving new owners more headaches, and Tesla is a big reason why: J.D. Power study:

J.D. Power’s study tracks responses from nearly 100,000 purchasers and lessees of 2024 vehicles within the first 90 days of ownership, and for the first time in the study’s 38-year history, it incorporates repair visit data. Overall, internal combustion engine (ICE) vehicles averaged 180 PP100 (or 180 problems per 100 vehicles), while battery electric vehicles (BEVs) averaged a whopping 266 PP100, 86 points higher than ICE vehicles.

Automakers have typically said that EVs are generally less problematic and require fewer repairs than ICE vehicles because they have a smaller number of parts and systems. However, J.D. Power’s study with newly incorporated repair data shows EVs, as well as plug-in hybrid electric vehicles (PHEVs), require more repairs than gas-powered vehicles in all repair categories.

“Owners of cutting edge, tech-filled BEVs and PHEVs are experiencing problems that are of a severity level high enough for them to take their new vehicle into the dealership at a rate three times higher than that of gas-powered vehicle owners,” wrote Frank Hanley, senior director of auto benchmarking at J.D. Power, in the study.

As Steve Green at Instapundit noted, “I’m so old, I remember when TCO was supposed to be EV’s big advantage.” And it is true!  TCO, or Total Cost of Ownership, looks well beyond just the sticker price of getting the vehicle off the lot. That’s just the start of it. Two things were always hammered at us as to why we should go electric and ditch ‘Ole Faithful sitting in the garage because of fossil fuel usage:

1. While gas engines have tons of parts and are rather complicated due to Government regulations, an electric motor is much simpler.
2. Gas is much more expensive than electricity.

Yeah, well, see the quoted part about repairs; most of the needed repairs have nothing to do with the motors – it’s all of the other stuff in a car. Sure, I might give Tesla a pass on that due to “not much time in grade” with larger-scale design and manufacturing, but what about all of the other mainstay auto manufacturers getting into the EV space? Sure, they are dealing with the same issues with batteries, power distribution, and electric motors like Tesla but they’ve had a century of experience with getting all of the “other stuff” that makes up a car, right?  So what’s their excuse for all this?

Part of that TCO is finding out that instead of getting 30-40 thousand miles on a set of tires, it’s more like 10-15 thousand—and much more expensive to boot due to larger sizes having to support all that weight of the battery bank. And the specter of replacing that bank far sooner than most have to replace an ICE engine.

This results in almost half of all EV owners starting to regret their choice to move away from internal combustion engine-based cars—they wish to rekindle that flame by ditching the EV.

We are starting to look at going back to being a two-car family again as TMEW won’t drive the F-150 crew cab (“too big!”) – it’s more like a RAV4 (and after seeing one yesterday, she’s willing to look at the new and much smaller Ford Maverick pickup). I asked her about getting an electric car. While she doesn’t read as much about them as I do, she has rejected that idea outright even as her driving will be REAL local. But what she’s read of the problems (lately, getting locked in a Tesla and unable to get out due to a malfunction), she decided she’ll stick with the known issues.

The post EVs, ICEVs, Repairability, and Outrage – Part 2 appeared first on Granite Grok.

This is the company that Terry Red-Flag Roy keeps. Specifically, Manchester State Rep (in name only) Alissandra Murray, whose reelection Red-Flag Roy essentially endorsed. Alissandra apparently believes that we should celebrate Juneteenth as Independence Day:

And NOT the Fourth of July because there is NO mention of the 4th on her X (Twitter) in contrast to the tweets above regarding Juneteenth. (Note: I am writing this on the AM of the 5th.)

Needless to say, this reflects the mindset of America’s Woke-Communists. They believe that America is evil … founded primarily for the slavery of African-Americans. Therefore, America’s founding on July 4th is NOT something to be celebrated.

The company that Red-Flag Roy keeps.

The post Useful Idiot Part VI … “Rep” Alissandra Murray Does NOT Celebrate Independence Day (Not On July 4th, That Is) appeared first on Granite Grok.

After Biden’s meltdown in the debate, support from many Democratic politicians, big-money donors, and the mainstream media is falling off the proverbial cliff and looking for Joe to throw in the towel. Joe says “NO”! Some attribute this stubborn refusal more to Jill Biden, the President’s wife, and her love of power than to Joe himself. Regardless, they say they are in it until the finish.

That’s fine by me. Joe’s support has fallen behind Trump’s even more since the debate and contributions are drying up. Anyone thinking the 25th Amendment will be applied to remove Joe might be disappointed because I don’t think Kamala has the guts to initiate the action as required. It also seems unlikely she can get a two-thirds vote from both houses of Congress to carry the motion. Again, how long would that take?

I may be wrong, but it does seem to be a real uphill climb plus a huge distraction for the Democratic party with only four months left until the election to build up a new candidate. Even if it did happen, that would throw open the Democratic National Committee’s Convention, and several new names may compete to be the Presidential nominee.

So if Joe is ousted or dies between now and then, who’s on deck?

Well, Kamala, as VP, would be in charge (in case of death) until the new President is inaugurated. The Presidential vote would not likely favor her. She is not liked by Democrats to begin with, and her being the force behind Joe being dumped would not sit well with many other Dems.

Gavin Newsom’s name is well known but the damage he has done in California plays very strongly against him.

How about JFK Jr.? He’s blessed with name recognition but is currently only drawing about 6 percent support. He might be the Democrats’ best shot, but how much time, again, would it take the DNC to come together, go through the process of removing Biden, inserting Kennedy Jr., and then start all that’s needed to build a new challenger’s campaign?

It’s a lot to think about, it seems to me, but would desperation power such a process?

Politically, we could be in store for anything. but the lazy, crazy days of summer?

The post Joe and Jill Biden Fighting On appeared first on Granite Grok.

Vermonters who don’t pay close attention to politics may have been surprised this month (July 2024) to find their paychecks a little lighter than expected, the result of a new payroll tax passed into law last year (Act 76). According to the Joint Fiscal Office, this 0.44 percent tax (0.11 percent for the self-employed) applies to everyone who earns a paycheck and will collect a total of around $100 million per year in new revenue for the legislature to spend. Of course, that’s (another) $100 million less for the roughly 350,000 Vermonters participating in the labor force to spend on whatever our priorities might be. Is this fair?

The proponents of the payroll tax think so, or at least want you to think so. Their argument is, “It’s less than half a percent tax. A mere pittance! You can afford it!” As always, they’re “just asking” you to pay a little more. But try politely declining to pay up and find out what “just asking” really means!

According to MIT’s state-by-state calculation of what someone needs to earn to cover their basic needs, a single Vermonter with no children must earn $47,892 before taxes. So, this new payroll tax would cost such a person $211 a year, bringing them that far below the level necessary to meet their own basic needs.

What is $211 for a person at this income level? In concrete terms, again, according to MIT, it’s more than two weeks’ worth of groceries. Or two months’ worth of internet connectivity. Or four tanks of gas to get to and from work, etc. In other words, real, important stuff.

A family of four (two adults and two kids) needs to earn $91,507 to cover their basic needs. This new payroll tax impacts such as family to the tune of $403 a year. Again, the state kicked the chair out from under people working hard to keep their noses above the financial waterline.

Now, according to the US Census, the median nonfamily household income in Vermont is $46,022 – or already below the basic needs income before the implementation of this payroll tax. The median household income is $96,345. According to the Vermont Tax Department, over 150,000 tax returns filed in Vermont for all households (family and nonfamily) reported income of $49,000 or less. These are the people getting genuinely hammered by this tax.

But here’s where the injury meets insult. Act 76 creates a dynamic in which you can have a single mother (or many such single parents) of adolescent children working a minimum wage job paying this tax on her wages – on top of her regular income taxes – in order to subsidize the childcare of a family earning $202,055 (or 575 percent of federal poverty levels)! And that’s just obscene.

More injury, Act 76 states, “In fiscal year 2024, the amount of $4,200,000.00 is appropriated from the General Fund to the Department of Taxes to be used for the implementation of the Child Care Contribution.” This is for “The establishment of the following 15 new permanent classified positions authorized in the Department of Taxes in fiscal year 2024.” Over $4 million of the taxes collected on this tax go toward paying over two dozen new bureaucrats to collect the tax. That’s $280,000 per new hire! How is that possible? But it is indicative of the real goal here: creating a well-paid class of government-employed elites funded, for the most part, by lower and middle-income, working-class people. (Suggested Reading: The Coming of Neo-Feudalism by Joel Kotkin.)

A final warning…. This 0.44 percent payroll tax raises only a fraction of the amount necessary to cover the long-term plans for this program. According to the Rand Study that formed the basis of this legislation, it will require three and a half to five times as much revenue. Childcare subsidies are not the only program our legislators have targeted the payroll tax to pay for. They are also eyeing the payroll tax to pay for a universal paid family leave program (H.66). So, this “little bit” is just about getting the camel’s nose under the tent.

And a last point…. this latest upping of “your fair share” via a new payroll tax is just one of many such cuts inflicted by this legislature in this last biennium alone. There’s also the unprecedented property tax increase (Act 183), the Renewable Energy Standard mandates that will jack up electric bills (Act 179), the 20 percent increases in DMV fees (Act 62), and the coming estimated 70 cents per gallon carbon tax on home heating fuel (Act 18). And those are just the biggest hits. The total, on top of what was already one of the highest state tax burdens in the nation, is not small. It’s not fair.

But, as Senator Mark MacDonald admitted in a moment of candor about he and his colleagues under the Golden Dome, “We don’t do things based on helping poor people.” No, they certainly don’t.

The post What “Paying Just a Little More” Really Means appeared first on Granite Grok.

I’ve been listening to these dire predictions for LITERALLY 50 years from mid-wits who don’t have the science chops to make such predictions. These bureaucrats use this tactic to wind up and create severe doom-and-gloom anxiety among actual nitwits.

I don’t know which is worse—the meaningless yammering or the fact that I’ve reached the age where I’ve had to listen to 50 years of EVERY. SINGLE. STUPID. SOOTHSAYING message from our Climate Betters (or Climate Con-Artists trying to justify their jobs; pick one or the other).

United Nations Climate Chief: ‘We Have Two Years to Save the Planet.’

…others are leveraging the warming weather to decry the supposedly warming planet. The United Nations (UN), which never saw a socialist pry-bar it didn’t try to apply to the free world, is no exception to that.

Simon Stiell is the Executive Secretary of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change. Did you know they had one of those? Nor did I, but it’s not too surprising. The UN has a plethora of offices designed to hector us to behave in the ways that the UN wants us to; we are fortunate indeed that, unlike our government, the UN can only nag, not compel.

In another example of the UN’s nagging, on Wednesday, Simon Stiell took to X/Twitter to claim that we have two years left to save the planet.

We have two years to save the world.

Starting now, we need:

A quantum leap in climate finance

Bold new national climate plans by all nations that protect people, boost jobs and drive inclusive economic growth

More https://t.co/LmM3rX8fpc pic.twitter.com/zJjIdh0VEK

— Simon Stiell (@simonstiell) April 10, 2024

See here as well: https://t.co/LmM3rX8fpc



Smug sorta guy, like all the rest of them involved in this grift.

Except for Al Gore – he’s in panic mode all the time despite none of his predictions of “climate disasters” coming true. And yet, there are followers paying good money to these prophets of doom (just like Ibram X Kendi and Robin DiAngelo are for “anti-racism” and “white fragility”). Think of these paying fools who have never realized that climate ALWAYS changes incrementally every year and tremendously over various Epochs. But a buck is a buck, and Stiell is no different in guilting people.

In his case, however, he wants governments to be the guilty “people” and cave to the UN. After all, THEIR grift is to become the “over-country” in which all other countries give up their sovereignty to the UN and tax their people to death to make the UN feel good about themselves.

See what I just did there? Anyway, two years is all we’ve got left. So, given that it’s been 50 years, can I wish that “Party like it’s 1999” also meant I’d have the young body I had back then?

However, let me be kind to ClimateBat (instead of Moonbat)  as he looks “long term” compared to a couple of the predictions from the post:

• In 2019, “Think Progress” breathlessly reported we had 14 months to save the planet.
• In 2009, United Kingdom Prime Minister Gordon Brown claimed, “We have fewer than fifty days to save our planet from catastrophe.”

Yeah, the Climate Catastrophe Credibility has worn a bit thin and is highly tattered, but that won’t stop them at all. As with all things of the Left, it’s all about the intent and never the results. They know it—they just depend on everyone else to NOT know it.

And sadly, because it’s been 50 years, too few haven’t fallen for this.

The post Yep, The UN Is Not Above “Climate Catastrophe” Fearmongering; “We Have Two Years To Save The Planet!!!” appeared first on Granite Grok.