Covering Climate Now is an organization advancing the Climate Change cause. I’ve subscribed to their newsletter for some time now. They want me (all subscribers) to participate by writing up our own experience with Climate Change (now called extreme weather event attribution) and how it has affected us in our daily lives.
Here’s my story:
We live in the foothills above Denver, Colorado (USA), and often have to drive a twisty-turny road (Highway 285) to get down there. What we see happening around us is truly disturbing. It seems that every year around mid-to-late October, it snows. The snow sometimes freezes on pavement, and we notice cars having driven off the road, sitting in ditches, sometimes upside down. We pray no one was hurt.
We blame Climate Change for this. Our climate has been going from warmer to colder and back to warmer again for a long time now, far more often than I remember during my Montana childhood, when it was cold all the time. Sometimes the temperature swings are as much as 60°F! I distinctly remember one time in one July when we hit 85°F on our thermostat, and then later that year, in December, we had one of those “Arctic Fronts” come through, and it got down to -10°F! That’s a 95F° swing, and that is scary. That’s Climate Change. It is dangerous.
Oh yeah, it’s happening all righty. I saw a graph of daily high temperatures from 1918 to 2018, and it said that during that time, our climate had warmed .45°F over that 100-year period. That’s scary.
I see no way off this merry-go-round other than to follow Covering Climate Now, and demand that we build more windmills, solar panels, and stop eating beef, and drive EVs, using them when they catch on fire to stay warm. I look forward to the day that nitrogen-based fertilizer is banned, as all of these bumper crops we are having are causing havoc! Imagine all the diesel it takes to haul the products to market! How much better off would be be without that problem!
Having grown up in Montana, USA, and I distinctly remember that it was always cold, all the time, when I went to school each day. Now I bet kids are wearing shorts. And forget about skiing. David Viner warned us on February 2, 2011 (now known as David Viner Day) that snowfall would become “a very rare and exciting event.” Another prediction come true, along with Miami under water and bald eagles dying off en masse, oh wait, that’s something else.
I thank Covering Climate Now for always telling us the truth, never exaggerating, making up facts, or engaging in character assassination when people disagree. That’s how science is done, you see: Declare that you are right, are part of a consensus, listen carefully to opposing voices, especially those of distinguished scientists who might find you to be all wet.
We live in the Rockies, and have those mountains to protect us when California submerges. At least we have that.
Piece of Mindful 
Remember that graph you posted of all the climate models being wildly off the observed temperatures, ex the one from some Russian scientists? I think from Christy’s group at University of Huntsville. I ran it by a friend who is a big believer in the “consensus” of scientists as the most rational thing to rely on, vs the few dissenters he regards as fringe cranks funded by big oil and so on.
His response was that the mainstream of the field disputed how Christy presented their models, that he had adjusted or distorted them somehow to give a false picture. I don’t know the ins and outs of the whole debate, I haven’t looked for any response comments or papers and probably won’t – it would likely end up being “above my pay grade” to try to judge or mediate the dispute between the two sides – statistical modelling and such, I can imagine there would be all sorts of ways to rejigger them based on the results desired. Unless Christy used the actual, identical graph lines they gave prior to any observed results coming in? Then it would be hard to cry foul.
Anyway, I thought it might be an interesting topic for a blog post, if it interests you, to see if there’s any credibility to the claim.
LikeLike
I don’t know about a blog post, as the topic draws so little interest. As to the game of who do you trust, I’ve been at this long enough to know that the IPCC is corrupt, and was set up to fence in the real science and to promote false science, the climate models a large part of that. I’ve followed Christy a long time, and it is not so much him as the fact that he draws on satellite data, CERES, and that the routine climate change guys have been after him since day one. They claim the satellite data is not reliable because the orbit is in decay, but mathematically, he can adjust for that. And it’s not satellite data alone, but weather balloon data that he uses as well, and the two correlate highly.
My own observations here in Colorado are that there has been no change in our climate, and NOAA inadvertently agreed with that. They had temperature data for our state going back to 1918 and through 2018, and it was downloaded and published by Bob Tisdale. NOAA itself does not release this data. He graphed the highest monthly temperature for the various weather stations. You can complain if you want about their location, but when measuring change over time, that does not matter. His conclusion: The net change, 1918-2018 was .156°F per decade, or 1.56°F over 100 years. That is not even perceptible.
I’m going to do one more post below rather than a blog post, one that tells me more than what I want to know about what is going on behind the scenes, how our power grid is being systematically dismantled. No one is reporting on this.
LikeLike
I’m very doubtful about the integrity of the mainstream too, I just like to examine the claims from both sides to the extent I can make sense of them (with limited time and expertise.) As Petra argues, a layperson can get some sense from a debate between experts about which side is being fair, addressing all points, etc.
It sounds from what you write here that the mainstream objects to his claims about the “actual observed temperature” data? So does that mean, that if we made the same graph using their preferred “observed temperatures,” their models track more closely? So the debate is over, how does one measure global temperature appropriately..?
I guess what would be interesting to me to know, in that case, is if the mainstream has been consistent in their methods of measurement. Ie, if they used the same methods of measurement at the time they made the models, as they do now. And, of course, there could be no “special adjustments” post hoc, after the models come out. Or other funny business during data collection. That would at least be something. Then, a separate debate about, are these even the best methods to measure global temperature. So one, is there internal consistency at least, and two, is it beside the point though because their models are tested against a faulty reading of global temperature.
LikeLike
Also biological life has been found to exist from the freezing point all the way to the boiling point of water. Which is 491-671 Rankine degrees. If Colorado is sitting at 510 degrees average, then that is actually more towards the middle of the curve of what biological life prefers, which is about 20 Rankine cooler than body temperature, or 540R.
LikeLike
Tim, there is no measurement of the temperature of the planet. 2/3 of it is ocean. Most of the land areas are not measured. Planet temperature is a fiction.
My point was that NOAA had a set of records going back to 1918 at least, within our square state. These records included a record hot temperature for each month, somewhere. That set of temperatures is remarkably consistent, a very slightly rising line on a graph, and I assume you know we can make a line out of spikes on a graph and measure a running average, that is, everything to the left of the spikes is averaged at any point on the graph.
The numbers, the gathered temperatures might be arbitrary, but when you are measuring change over time, arbitrary works as long as there is consistency. You would expect that if we re in a severe warming trend, a severe rise on the line. It’s not happening. That is the point.
LikeLike
It’s surprising, but not surprising that with all the increase in human activity the temperature only went up 1.5 degrees. Because there is a lot more machines like cars and planes, pavement, development, and people in Colorado than there were 100 years ago, all of which are going to contribute to heat – which really is just infrared radiation. However clearly the earth, oceans, and atmosphere have a huge heat capacity, which will cause any surface temperature increase to equilibrate with the background heat sinks.
LikeLike
There is this thing called Urban Heat Island – it is warmer in Downtown Denver due to buildings and blacktop. I read someone say, and did not write it down, dammit, that if you remove UHI, we’ve had no warming to speak of. IPCC refuses to adjust for UHI other than only modestly, as they surely know that part of the warming scale to be critical to their cause.
There was a Little Ice Age that ended around 1860 or so, and the planet has been gradually warming since, fits and starts of course. The warmest period was the 1930s, Dust Bowl and all that. That’s apparent on temperature graphs … and that’s why the National Fire Information Center purged all forest fire data prior to 1983 … hot weather means more fires. In the 30s we had 50 million acres burning annually, and now typically we have 10-12 million. That data looked bad for the warming crowd, so they got rid of it. By truncating the data 1983 forward, it looks like fires are on the increase. They are not.
LikeLike
The UHI is very significant. When I lived in the city of Boston i would drive to New Hampshire often, and it would typically be 10 degrees warmer in the city than one hour north in the woods.
LikeLike
UHIs have been identified all over the world, and their heat discrepancies from surrounding areas measured. IPCC largely ignores this information.
LikeLike
That’s 1.5 degrees Fahrenheit, by the way, barely perceptible.
You’re a smart guy, so take this as merely a differing point of view from someone for whom “Smart Water” just doesn’t work, but our impact on the planet, easily seen from flyover, is massive, and at the same time, the factors affecting temperature are even larger. There are ocean currents, El Niños, Milankovitch cycles, insolation (which IPCC amazingly discounts), and even, if only to a very slight degree, CO2 levels. The latter was chosen for the climate change hoax because it is a tool that can be used to attack our way of life, our well-being and prosperity directly, misanthropy masquerading as science. Bill Gates, is a fake genius/billionaire. He and his grandfather and father are/were eugenicists. Gates presumes that he should be a preferred occupant of the planet over others. Views on that differ,
LikeLike
How many people know absolute zero is -460 degrees F? Therefore if the average temperature of Colorado increased 1.5 degrees, and lets assume the average temp was 50F, or 510 Rankine, then the average temperature went from 510 Rankine to 511.5 Rankine. Or a 0.2% increase in absolute terms. Its very hard to make an instrument with that kind of precision, but 0.1% RSD (or root mean square error of deviation) is excellent precision.
LikeLike
R. L. Hails Sr. P. E. (Ret.)
| September 2, 2025 at 2:45 pm | Reply
Thank you Dr. Curry for your contribution, your guidance to this engineer, not a scientist, for your clear summary of the issues facing our nation. (I have summarized my professional background in earlier blogs.) I value the debate among learned scholars but recognize, from my background, significant ad hominem logic, on the effects of fire, the combustion of carbon in air, on our climate at a macro scale. Synthesizing the two professional approaches, I have come to this:
Any technologically advanced society which eschews the widespread, economic use of fire, will cease to exist. There are many sources of energy but fire will remain the bedrock supporting our way of life, through the vague prophesies decades or centuries from now, beyond the life span of my young grandchildren. Our near term threats are summarized here:
Our grid is creaky, the average age of our power generating units, in prior generations would have rendered them as candidates for shut down. They are vulnerable to forced outages, the sudden collapse or major equipment which is no longer readily available within the US. We might have to petition China or others, for long lead time replacements.
We no longer have a robust cohort of veteran engineers, technologists who have lived through the design development, A – Z, fabrication, construction, error corrections, shake out, start up and lock – in of new generation units. It takes twenty years of practice, from graduation to senior engineer but these Americans do not exist in significant numbers. We quit building decades ago; once we put a major unit on line every few weeks.
We no longer see the best and brightest go into certain STEM careers. Why should they? Have you ever read a news article praising those who made Three Mile Island safe? (I knew them.) Do you know that off normal event happened years earlier and was handled by experts with no fan fare. But TMI killed a major industry in America, which is vital to our survival. I participated in the mass lay offs of very skilled people, an order of magnitude larger than what the federal work force is now facing.
Other nations which have abandoned fire for electrical supply are seeing the cost of juice skyrocketing. It is not survivable; governments will fall, hopefully peaceably.
Our politicians can no longer kick this can down the calendar.
God bless the USA.
LikeLiked by 1 person
OK, my day is officially over now. I’ll deal with Rankine tomorrow. New to me.
LikeLike
Reporting scientific data like temperature without including the standard error of the measurement is a big no no in science. Or is supposed to be. Its a scientifically invalid statement to say the temperature increased 1.5 degrees, because the standard error is likely 1-2 degrees. And as i said before temperature is not an absolute measurement, it is inferred from for example a mercury thermometer which must be carefully calibrated at the factory and then checked periodically.
LikeLike
OK, I get that … statistically, when a margin of error “crosses zero” then the number is meaningless. Right?
LikeLike
Yes my point is they should be reporting the temperature as a range, because there is error in both the instrument measurement, and the way they are reporting a single temperature, which is clearly impossible. And there are multiple sites where temperatures are taken at certain times etc. Realistically we are looking at least one degree, if not more if they properly did error modeling, and propagated the error in each of these variables i listed above.
LikeLike
Understood, but with the data I cited for Colorado, it was change over time, and not specific temperatures on a certain date. That change is a separate measurement regardless of baseline temperatures.
LikeLike
How do you measure a change without a baseline condition?
LikeLike
You have a starting and ending point.
LikeLike
In my example the temperature in 1918 should be reported as 509-511 with plus minus one degree of error. In 2018 it would be 510.5-512.5. Those values overlap and hence are scientifically identical. That is if that is the correct error it may be larger than one degree. If anything it proves the climate is stable in temperature long term over 100 years.
They should also report the temperatures in absolute values of Kelvin or Rankine, which more accurately show the scale of the changes were talking about. Even 5 degrees is pretty minior swing at 500 Rankine.
LikeLike
So Rankine is merely another form of Kelvin, based on Fahrenheit.
LikeLike
Please unsubscribe me from your mailing list Thank You
LikeLike
Much easier for you just to put you in your SPAM basket. That way, you can cancel your own goddammed subscription. I suppose you’re making a statement, however.
LikeLiked by 1 person
“Tim, there is no measurement of the temperature of the planet. 2/3 of it is ocean. Most of the land areas are not measured. Planet temperature is a fiction. …”
Interesting, but doesn’t address my questions about the Christy graph. For one thing, Christy, a dissenter, nevertheless apparently thinks planetary temps are real enough to use in his graph (the observed data he shows.) Even if he uses different sources from the mainstream. I’m just trying to understand the mainstream’s accusation that he misrepresented their models, or compared them against the “wrong” data, or whatever they claim. And then weigh the claims of both sides. I can’t give the graph to “believers” as any sort of evidence of science fraud, if I don’t understand the debate about his graph.
LikeLike
Cristy is measuring atmospheric temperatures in the lower and mid troposphere and lower stratosphere.
LikeLike
Ay yi yi.. Maybe after some coffee I’ll know what to make of that. I guess the mainstream is using some other temp readings, to gauge their models by? I think that would be fair enough, if they’re the same ones they used when they made the predictions.. ie, would show some level of predictive power in their models, if they came close to their own “check” temps. Putting aside whose “observed temps” are best to use, or whether any measurement of global temp is possible.
LikeLike
They must use the same basis, but they “run hot”. Their predictions do not hold water, have not come to pass, but unfortunately, are the basis for most government policies regarding climate change. (If they did not run hot, there would be no Climate Change movement, no crisis. Ergo, they are not only tolerated, but promoted as real.)
LikeLike
I’m inclined to agree with your general take on the movement, certainly it’s massively promoted and there are many red flags and much absurdity around the whole thing. It’s also a controlled dialectic, the clash between the two sides seems managed as well, hard to know where exactly they intend to take it or on what timeline.
As far as Cristy’s graph, I would be curious to see how far they “run hot” when using their own preferred numbers, guess I should try to search for that. If you or anyone knows what forum that might have appeared in, when/ if they responded directly to Cristy, please let me know.
I heard an interesting “third door” take on climate change in a recent John le Bon interview with Lez Luthor. Lez said he was long a skeptic of the official narrative, then began to think the climate was indeed changing. I think from anecdotal impressions maybe, milder winters, peoples’ memories, etc, maybe. To me, on those short timelines, that would go to the idea of natural climate variability, as the historical record as you’ve described here indicates long term shifts between cooling and warming periods. But he proposed a hypothesis in which the various “cures” for global warming – wind farms, vast solar arrays – somehow themselves cause warming. Sounds incredible, but listen to the interview anyone who wants to hear his reasoning. I’d have to hear a bit more than he gives to be persuaded, but I appreciated at least hearing a novel take on the issue.
LikeLike
I am skeptical of our ability to affect our climate, given that we’ve been pouring CO2 into the atmosphere since the beginning of the Industrial Revolution, and temperatures remain stable, variability aside. The thing we have done that is addressable is pollution, and since the 1970s we have indeed done a good job, much more to be done forever, of course. For instance, we can construct coal power plants using scrubbers, and all pollutants are removed. I say that tongue-in-cheek, as the only thing emitted with all the safeguards in place is CO2. That’s under dispute, though I don’t think it a pollutant. I think that was an essential element of the hoax.
LikeLike
Sure, I’m skeptical too aside from localized effects eg the urban heat islands, but these things seem like they would be subsumed into the larger system and have very marginal, temporary effect. Compare our output to that of one large volcanic eruption for instance – what’s the difference? I don’t think the climate is that fragile, it can absorb and balance whatever we throw at it probably. Given the vast scale. Whatever larger forces control the long term warming and cooling periods are probably beyond our capacity to influence. Aside from relatively marginal, short term effects.
Just to emphasize though, Lez was not saying he came around to the idea that CO2 does cause warming; rather that the “green” tech is ironically to blame. Though I likewise can’t see the buildout of that being on a scale to change the climate, even if he could convince me it has some effect.
LikeLike
I just want to thank wordpress for shadow banning my last comment “your comment could not be displayed”!! Maybe I used one of the seven words we cannot say publically.
Anyhow my point was climate change as you said is a 100% hoax, made to make people feel guilty about having children, traveling, or just being alive. Because they are affecting the “planet’s” health, whatever the hell that is.
F-you word press by the way.
LikeLike
You know what? This is my fault, not WordPress. We had that guy come around name ending with 420 and he was telling lies about me, so I had to remember how to ban people, and I did, and I wrote his name in there, and there was one other name, a guy from years ago, and under his name I had written the word “F***”. That is why your comment got taken down. I do not recall doing that, and don’t care if people swear, but that solves a mystery. I’ll remove it tomorrow, and you’ll be free to say f*** as much as you please.
LikeLike
We had a small story here in Birmingham lately with a bunch of number markers. Halloween day we awoke to news of a fire in a picturesque historic business area called Cobb Lane (the alley/ side street running behind it is paved in cobblestone.) The area is a few blocks off a larger business area called 5 Points (five roads intersect there) with a fountain and sort of pagan sculpture by a now deceased local artist of some acclaim.) Restaurants and nightspots surrounded the intersection. The small Cobb Lane area included a restaurant/ bar with outdoor seating, maybe sort of like a German beer garden style (?), charming and picturesque.
Anyway it’s been reported to be an arsonist who set the blaze at 5:33am and was booked into jail a couple days later at 1:33am. And so on, but those really jumped out. So my question – what exactly was the motive, if this was staged on some level? Some sort of redevelopment plans and this would avoid some kind of red tape, or lengthy process? I guess it will be more clear when we see what takes shape there..
LikeLike
That’s very interesting. I happened to catch some of the coverage of the NY city mayoral race, and was surprised to see Curtis Sliwa running, and getting press coverage. As a kid in the 80s with a conservative bent, he was a bit of a hero to me, sad to say. Anyhow I looked up his history and holy cow is this guy spooked. Want to know what the original name of the Guardian Angels was? The Magnificent 13. I ain’t lyin’. And he claims to have been shot and escaped an assassination attempt by Gotti for chrissakes. Makes me wonder where they find these people and what purpose they serve – especially since his organization ostensibly was a “positive” one that advocated for self defense, and training in self defense, which are very reasonable and useful things for people to know. In sum, he’s controlled opposition – he’s the guy for the conservative New Yorker frustrated with living in a big government high tax shitty city.
Curtis Sliwa – Wikipedia
LikeLike
That’s a curious thing about controlled opposition, that “90% useful, 10% tainted” or whatever.. some of them must be genuine about the “good” part of their messaging, no? Are they told explicitly, “hey man, you have to include this BS too if you want our promotion..”
Maybe it’s more subtle, as I’ve heard it described in the case of some directors – if they’re really just there for the filmmaking, but producers require them to include xyz motifs, they may not know exactly what the larger agenda is, just suspect. But they get to do their thing. Or they’re totally read in, maybe a Christopher Nolan or Kubrick, and they’re fully onboard with serving the agenda/ great religious/ occult purpose via art. Likewise the influencers of various levels, some may be oblivious to their larger role in the dialectic, just occasionally have strings attached or not. But higher level they fully understand. Which is where it gets a little weird to me. That they might spread a lot of “truth” of some sort but still be down with being wolves in sheep’s clothing. That’s a very odd kind of double life, split personality, it would seem. /End ramble..
LikeLike
What makes it clear Silwa is one of “them” is the kid gloves the media gives him on his previous fakes/hoaxes. He has been caught red-handed faking confrontations with criminals several times, which he blithely answered as promotion for the guardian angels. Yet the mainstream media still writes long generally positive pieces on him, like the recent piece in the New Yorker. In some ways its surprising they even tell us about his fakes, but they may have been so sloppy they had to be reported “truthfully”. And he was supposedly expelled from his Jesuit high school while being class president. And he married a Jewish woman so his kids are Jewish. Go figure.
LikeLike
Just my age showing, but when Jane Fonda went to Hanoi, supposedly, it enraged people and enflamed them … she was controlled opposition, but the thing I finally. absorbed, only looking back and not at the time, was that it did not matter that anyone was for or against the war, only that we were for or against the war. That was the point. It was all beyond the reach of public opinion, nothing anybody thought about it mattered, but they used the conflict to keep us occupied while they went on about their business over there, whatever that was.
And I get the same feeling about Trump. It doesn’t matter what he is up to, only that people follow him. He’s controlled opposition too, and as with Jane, it does not matter if we are for or against his activities. We have no say in anything. I do think he has gathered up all of the anti-climate changers in one place, probably his purpose. They gotta follow someone, why not someone under control of the enemy?
LikeLike
I love the analogy you brought up previously of the marching band in Animal House, directed into an alley, bouncing against the dead end. That does describe the MO of pretty much every leader, especially the divisive ones who generate strong opinions for and against: like Malcolm X, RFK, MLK, and now Trump.
LikeLike
Not a day has went by since Trump’s first term, that he hasn’t been on television and the internet news media. I don’t know any other president that has been sorched in the mainstream news media. Obama and Biden got quite a bit but not as much as Trump. I rarely saw Reagan, Bush, or Clinton in the news, except a few times a month or when the major events happened. Maybe it’s because of the the recent cell phone culture needing constant updates.
LikeLike
This is really interesting, although George Will is a token approved controlled op conserative:
Opinion | Bill Gates shows intellectual responsibility on climate change – The Washington Post
Will says a bunch of things that makes sense, then drops the bomb of eradication of smallpox, a fake disease caused by skin trying to exude poisons out through the skin, as one of the most major human achievements. And then globalization. That has worked out really no so well for the masses, but rather the “elite” Will claims to criticize on climate change.
LikeLike
I once called a guy I used to work near, not with, a nice guy and smart. I had to remind him of who I was and he thought about it and said “You’re still alive?”
I just had that same thought about George Will. He once said as a baseball fan, paraphrasing, that American life is like football, violence interspersed with committee meetings. George Will is still alive?
LikeLike
I saw a bit of chatter this morning on fb about the “Kirk widow’s” inappropriate behavior in wake of her husband’s death. Blue team relishes it in a gossipy way, red team is angst-ridden at their sniping, trying not to see it themselves and just focus on her noble victim status. They gossip about how the sniping is in bad taste. Just funny that that topic grabs people, out of everything out there.
LikeLike
Good that you put “widow” in quotes. These people who put on a public show of fake emotion have a hard job, I would not want to be her. One thing about Charlie that interests me is that overwhelming widow’s peak on his forehead. All of our Brats have widow’s peaks, but not like that. I want to do some work on it but real work is interfering. My office is a mess, but then it always is. I like to pat myself on the back for that, saying “You’re not really an accountant, are you.” Yeah, I am, dammit. I passed the CPA exam first try, and thought I had a career because of it, but I was a mismatch. All that meant was that I was good at taking tests, but I never worked for an accounting firm, rebelled at the idea going to work in suits and then working all day in shirtsleeves. I just now had the idea that I need to clean up my office and sit down and decide what my professional qualifications are. They are not many. Passing that test meant that people looked at me differently, but I had not changed from what I was, which I still don’t get.
LikeLike
I have an unfortunate widow’s peak myself.. and have to fight hard for my hair not to look like Conan O’Brien’s goofy flop over curl, ha.
Everyone on fb was calling her “the widow Kirk” actually I think.. funny construction, like it’s the 19th century or The Scarlet Letter or something.
On controlled op for divide and conquer, and it not mattering what people think, yes.. There’s a brilliant one that just popped up, sparked by Tucker Carlson. He attacked Christian Zionists as heretics and said he hates them (then partly apologized.) It sparked a frenzy of other conservative pundits for and against his remarks, and is being called a MAGA civil war.. drawing a hard line between “America first” and “Israel first” camps.. or however labeled. But as a strategy to splinter that large group, and diffuse any power they have (not real power, I just mean, having a large group all in unity, it becomes a force, even if they can’t direct it however they want.)
Instead, when there are many fragmented diverse groups, then those “acting” and setting policy have a free hand because no single group is large or weighty enough to unite against whatever they decide to do. And they’re all tied up in micro schisms and infighting.
Maybe. Just spitballing. Sometimes the brilliant thoughts don’t survive translation to writing..!
LikeLike
Do what I did, run for office! I got my ass kicked, and I am not saying that people should have voted for me for any particular virtue I might have possessed. It was just that as going door to door, save for some people who were up to speed on some wedge issue (abortion), it was a vast wasteland.
I ran on two issues, a clean water bill, and a minimum wage bill, each of which required signatures on petitions to qualify for the ballot. The reception was favorable and friendly, and lots of people signed, in fact, I qualified the two measures all on my own in my districts that year. Then the money people came out and ran TV ads against each initiative, and reception turned ugly, most people refused to sign. I was discouraged by the power of that blue light that reflected out of every window when I worked evenings.
We had a gathering outside a restaurant where Republicans were meeting, and I was asked (as kind of a fair-haired boy) to read a statement for the TV cameras. It was about Clinton the wonderful, and how, among other things, he had put thousands of new police on the streets. I gave it back to the gal that handed it to me, said “I can’t read this”, and left the gathering. I’ll never forget the cold wind blowing in my face as I walked away that night. I felt the sting of moral courage, which always bites a person in the ass.
Anyway, public opinion is watched carefully by leaders, but never under any circumstances heeded. As just recently when the vaccine and autism problem came to a head, Trump deflected. That’s the most you can ever hope for. Public opinion is watched, measured, but never heeded.
LikeLike
Nice reporting Tim, I saw that brouhaha about Carlson in the headlines, which I spend about 5 seconds reading every few days. Thanks for summarizing the BS plot point – more divide and conquer strategy.
I have a comment for Horst – I think that’s his username, our astute German commenter. He recently noted how the Euro/German electric grid is being turned into pulpwood as we speak, with not much future for industry in Europe. I read an interesting post on LinkedIn, of all places, by someone talking about how now the trains don’t even run on time in Germany anymore, and how they have huge delays now – an unprecedented event that likely hasn’t happened there for 200 years. Sounds like the airline industry in the USA, especially east coast, which is plagued by delays all the time.
LikeLike
I have spent about 5 seconds looking at Kirks widow until now. So I just took a hard look. Holy cow, she has a wicked resting bitch face. Absolutely looks like a “hard” woman, if you know what I mean. Not to go overboard but she looks like a witch – which (no pun intended!) are actually more common than you think. A lot of young women are drawn to that “religion” of wiccans and witches, it is extremely popular especially in New England with our fake witch trials.
Which leads me into why do they still care about protecting the legacy of the Salem Witch Trials? As if it were an early prototype for a Sandy Hook massacre, lots of kids killed, the horror of it all! And they do protect it, because there are still many advertisements in New England every year about the witch trials, and museums you “need” to visit to “learn” (become indoctrinated) about this “important” event in Americas history.
LikeLike
Ray – Thanks, I follow that sort of stuff on NakedCapitalism – their writer Nat Wilson Turner I think, covers all the brouhahas on X etc regularly, and all this gossipy political stuff.. and I get sucked in and spend too much time reading about it.. it’s a soap opera I guess.
LikeLike