Green Push on ‘Sesame Street’: Programming Your Kids For ‘Sustainable Living’
by Larry O'ConnorThis week marks the start of Sesame Street’s 40th season. As announced in an article in National Geographic, the show will be focusing on a green storyline this year:
As another example of the show’s forward thinking, Davis said, the new Sesame Street season that begins next week will introduce children to the basic ideas of sustainable living. “It’s a curriculum about nature and caring for the world that is just right for today,” he said. ”This show continues to stay very current with ideas that are in the zeitgeist.”
Sustainability. Makes you feel smart just reading that word, doesn’t it? Who doesn’t want sustainability? This is a great new tactic of the Left; the raping of our language and the use of beautiful sounding, unassailable words to represent an agenda with far more controversial ideas. Sustainability.
Sustainability is not just about putting your empty beer bottles into a special bin to keep them separate from your other trash. It’s also more than driving a car with a giant battery in it (which will eventually poison our water system after all of these “Hybrids” end up in a landfill… didn’t think about THAT, did you Mr. Begley?). It’s also more than building giant solar panels which require preciously scarce water to stay constantly clean and efficient or giant windmills which end up killing endangered birds. No, sustainability is not any of those ineffective yet relatively benign efforts at “saving our planet.” Sustainability, as a National policy, is the most regressive and dangerous idea the Green-Left has ever put forth. Sustainability is the death of the West’s economic dominance.
Spend just ten minutes reading up on the various aspects of sustainability, sustainable living, sustainability and de-growth, sustainability and population control… These concepts all start with the same basic premise: We humans, are the problem. There are too many of us, we are exploiting the earth’s resources… If we don’t radically change how we live, the earth will not be able to sustain us.
And now, it’s the new concept being pushed on our kids through those fuzzy little monsters on Sesame Street. We’ll be watching to see how this philosophy manifests itself and what little green seeds will be planted into the fertile minds of our pre-schoolers who were placed in front of the show by their parents hoping they’d get a head-start in phonics and counting.
Radical environmentalism, demonization of capitalism and corporations, social justice through environmental security… these issues, of course, will not be part of Elmo’s World… But, as PBS Ombudsman Michael Gelter said last week about Sesame Street’s Fox News parody:
I don’t know what was in the head of the producers, but my guess is that this was one of those parodies that was too good to resist. But it should have been resisted.
Let’s hope that radical environmentalism doesn’t turn out to be one of those ideas that the producers find “too hard to resist.”
Addendum: You think I’m exaggerating about this whole “Sustainability” message to our kids and how it will affect our economy? Take a look at the blog page that is associated with the National Geographic / Sesame Street article. They suggest that instead of buying a new Halloween costume, kids should swap old costumes with their friends. What kid of insignificant impact on our environment would such a move make? But, ask the poor guy who owns the Halloween costume shop in your town… what kind of impact will it have on him?
Email this to a friend | Print |
Share on Facebook
| Tweet this
| 
Follow Us on Twitter
Subscribe via RSS
Got a Tip?
107 Comments
All this sustainability nonsense is just that, nonsense. It is simply a means to an end for the Left. That end is ultimately to control every aspect of your life. To help get to their goal, they will and do use our own children against us. Through programs such as Sesame Street, the Left has another path to get to our children. The age group Sesame Street is aimed at is the perfect age to spoon feed the Leftist garbage to them. The kids will eat it right up.
[...] This post was mentioned on Twitter by johnnyA99, Michael Chavez. Michael Chavez said: Green Push on ‘Sesame Street’: Programming Your Kids For ‘Sustainable Living’ http://bit.ly/4ngb8J [...]
So how does Oscar the Grouch and recycling mesh together?
Oscar needs his garbage, man!
I live in Nevada where our population is only 2.6 million. A good chunk of the state is Federally owned. My proposal for sustainable living is this: Give us our freaking land so we can develop an cultivate it and do some real good with it, so we can expand our numbers. Just a thought.
Stage Right,
You are clearly mis-educated on what Sustainability is. I'm not some wacko environmentalist either, I'm not even a Democrat, but I've been studying sustainability for 5 years. It is the opposite of what you say it is. It wont make the west weaker, it will make us stronger by making our companies more efficient. Read "Confessions of a Radical Industrialist" by Interface Inc.'s CEO Ray Anderson. What was one of the reasons Interface is on a mission to become the first sustainable company? It will increase their profits!
You should just focus on Entertainment, and leave the important topics (like Sustainability) up to people who actually know something about it.
i think sustainability is a spectacular idea, we are talking about sustaining humans, are we not? because all those starving farmers are not being sustained in california, because the environitwits want to save some stupid fish. and our oil fueled economy is in a world of hurt, because environitwits won't let us explore, and develop our own oil and gas here. now the environitwits want us to pay our gubmit special taxes to lower our carbon footprint, while burning tons of fuel in their jets to tell us to stop doing what they do themself. and more people die of malaria than anything else in africa, because environitwits won' let them use known pesticide to eradicate the problem insects.
There are always people profiting handsomely from the environmentalist's credo.
Al Gore is a prime example.
not every industry is "sustainable". when you make plastics, they start with oil, when you make synthetic fabrics, they start with oil, when you make packaging to keep drugs, medical instruments, and food safe and clear of contaminants (hint plastic, see first example) it starts with oil. when you need to defend your country, it starts with airspace, planes don't fly with unicorns, they need oil. so most businesses that can do what they can to improve their bottom line can reuse, and recycle, cool. but how do you make steel, plastic, or other raw materials in the industrial chain, you need raw materials. energy is the lifebllod if industry, but depending on the wind or sun will not keep critical industries producing. we know oil, coal, natural gas, and nuclear power work. but environitwits prevent us from using proven methods of production. when and if some reasonable energy source shows up on the scene, and it will someday, we can switch then. but today we need to keep using what works. in the 1700's did they say he get rid of your horse, tractors are only a few hundred years off?
There's a fine line between education and indoctrination. Sesame Street has jumped over it and landed on the indoctrination side with two big fuzzy yellow feet.
As this video shows, maybe Sesame Street's environmentalists can also join the fight against Pelosi's health care bill: Conservatives and Environmentalists Agree on the 2,000 Page Pelosi Health Care Bill http://optoons.blogspot.com/2009/11/conservatives...
Well, Oscar does manage to find a use for everything he digs up… but then again, as he says, "I love it because it's trash."
And envirowhacks like you should stick to chewing on bark and using leaves to wipe your bottom and leave the important topics like Science and Meteorology and wildlife management to people who actually know what they are doing.
Yucca Mountain Nuclear Waste Depository. $13 billion dollars and 20 years in the making. Closed with one stroke of Obama's pen. The Left has no interest in real sustainability I assure you. They turn their back on the one real technology that can make a difference.
Does it make sense to recycle cans, sure. Build Cars that get better gas mileage. No Problem. Utilize re-usable bags at the grocery store instead of plastic bags, absolutely.
Does it make sense to pay 4x more for bamboo cabinets than wood, nope, you're an idiot and lining the pockets of the green goons. Does it make sense to bail out GM with billions on the hope that they build an electric car that nobody wants to drive, nope. How about drilling for oil on a couple of acres in Alaska, oh heavens no, the Caribou might sneeze.
This is a money grab. This is a power grab. I have no problem teaching responsibility and protecting our planet, but the left, as usual, has taken it to such a far extreme that unless something is done, we are going to be a nation forever weakened by a greedy few.
Further evidence that children are being used as targets of "End of World" fear mongering propaganda by the Greenies.
They get enough of it in school now they have to get in pushed on them by Big Bird?
My daughter is worried. She's afraid. She thinks the world is on the brink of ending. Why? Because some liberal brainwashed teacher used Gore's flawed eco-models to spell out doom and gloom. In my mind this is no better than child abuse. Children are having nightmares. Children are losing hope in a future. Children are being forced to hear someone's flawed arguments without hearing the other side.
Personally, I am this close to suing the Public School System. Looks like NPR will be on my list as well.
I saw the same thing on a disney chanel while at an acquaintances house last week. Their little kids were propped on the couch watching all of the blather being spewed about how to save the planet etc etc. I just shook my head because those little kids are learning early on how to be a liberal sheep.
enemiesinwar.com
"Personally, I am this close to suing the Public School System. Looks like NPR will be on my list as well"
Do it.
Apparently, Michael Davis is struggling to sound smart, appropriating big, fancy words like "sustainable" and "zeitgeist:" The article here does a good job addressing the absurdity of sustainability. I have one thing to add. As an author, Davis ought to know that one cannot observe the zeitgeist in the present. Of course, the book that ought to be written should explore Sesame Street's influence in crafting the spirit of the times.
[...] Green Push On ‘Sesame Street’: Programming Your Kids For ‘Sustainable Living’ [...]
Once again for the cheap seats; OBAMA AND THE PROGRESSIVES DON'T CARE ABOUT THIS COUNTRY EXCEPT TO STEAL FROM US AND SPREAD THE WEALTH TO THE NEEDY OF THE WORLD. WE WILL NO LONGER HAVE TRICKLE DOWN ECONOMICS BUT TRICKLE UP POVERTY WHEN HE COPLETES THE TASK OF DESTROYING OUR ECONOMY TO CONFORM IT TO THE NEW WORLD ORDER. WAKE UP, YOU MORONS! Ahem, this has been a public service announcement.
Oops! 'completes the task' Terribly sorry and all….
When Sesame Street started I was a kid of ten, and I can remember teachers recommending even in ’69 to kids and parents to watch. I watched it for five minutes, deemed it stupid, and the dial was turned quickly to The Three Stooges, Little Rascals, Looney Toons, etc., or in the yard for some real fun. I don’t have Grandchildren yet, soon? …but I do have several great-nieces and nephews, and at a gathering they wanted to watch anything but Sesame Street, so there is hope for the future!
"giant windmills which end up killing endangered birds."
They also kill bats (because the bats think it's food do to the motion the blades make) and have thier own version of Urban heat island effect (though not actually called that).
Wait, they actually closed it? Why didn't we hear about this… this is HUGE!!!
And you are right, the left has no interest in sustainability (outside of the cash flow into their pockets that is)… . that is why they bar things that are actually sustainable every chance they get…. well with the enviro-nazi's that is who don't want their precious landscape "marred" by power lines going through their forests from windmills or solar panels to actually get TO the people… :/
But I agree with you whole heartedly on your post…
I think that sustainable living is something that should be taught to our kids from the toddler years and up. I also think that bartering is a great why to live a more sustainable life. There is a great site called http://barterquest.com where you can trade all your unneeded things with people who need what you have.
I'm not sure Sesame Street has the impact it once had. Other channels like Disney and Nick have saturated the market. Kids are more seasoned now and the Sesame Street audience is much younger than it once was. My son found it boring when he was three. Telling kids to recycle or repurpose something isn't a bad thing, but I'll reserve judgment until I see it.
There is nothing wrong with the concept of sustainability, by itself. Where the danger comes from is modern liberals start with raising awareness. When that doesn't accomplish their goals, they go to government to force people to live according to their beliefs.
That's where the danger is. If you think I'm going over board, have a look at the cap and tax bill the House recently passed. Congress says it will cost We The People the price of a postage stamp a day. If you believe that, enjoy the kool aid.
When Congress passed Medicare back in the 1960's the predicted the entire cost for the program would be $9 billion. I believe the current budget for this year alone is over $35 billion, and that's not even counting Medicaid.
Cap and tax in my opinion is going to cost the average household $7,000+ per year, and add about 6% to unemployment rolls permanently. Those jobs will never come back because the energy costs associated with hiring them will never cover their productivity.
And all this might happen because, gosh darn, yes we can, hope & change. Pray your job isn't one the ones disappearing.
[...] here to read the rest: Green Push on ‘Sesame Street’: Programming Your Kids For ‘Sustainable Living’ This entry is filed under America – Blogs, Big Hollywood. You can follow any responses to this [...]
You are correct about the left's war on the English language. Do not take your eyes off that battle, because they are far from done.
When I was in high school reading 1984, I was horrified by the thought of controlling people via the language, and there by their very thoughts.
The left was taking notes.
Everyone, to be fair, let's distinguish "Sustainability" (which actually has more in common with Conservative beliefs than Liberal ones) from "Liberalism".
All Sustainability means is sound decision making that doesnt have a negative effect on future generations. Guess what: if the Healthcare bill passes and it ultimately results in worse healthcare, that isn't sustainable!
You can bash Liberal's interpretation of Sustainability, but don't bash the concept itself. Don't throw the baby out with the bathwater!
Here's an idea Conservatives. Take Sustainability and make it your own. Many of the Left's ideas are UNSUSTAINABLE. Capitalize on that, not the values behind Sustainability.
I am serious. We should get a class action lawsuit going. Pushing this on our children is criminal. Any lawyers out there????
NPR, PBS are tools of the Left, ironically funded by people who disagree with Leftist cant. so what's the surprise that puppets are using puppets to create more puppets?
Sustainability calls for a reconciliation of environmental, economic and social demands. I don't see anybody wanting to pay more for goods or have the luxeries in life taken away. Talk about wiping your butt with a leaf is funny, but when toilet paper is not white and soft, who wants it?
Civilization can be easier on the environment, but sustainability is a con unless we all want to live like the Amish.
If people freely choose to live so called "sustainably" I have no problems. The problem I do have is when their little projects don't create their much desired Utopia they are going to demand government force me to live according to their dictates.
That's how they always do it. Just wait to see the carnage and destruction of the health care system if this boon doggle goes through.
You know why there is almost always a shortage of flu shots? Because government "fixed" it.
That's what liberals want us to believe "sustainable life style" means. But its not. What they really mean is rich, powerful elites get to keep their huge mansions, private jets and fleets of limos, while we little people get shafted driving sardine can hybrids and pay ten times more for the precious little electricity they ration to us.
Civilization will be easier on the environment. People like the idea, and they will pay extra for it, as the free market continues to meet those desires.
The concept the left is pushing is the market is not providing fast enough so they will "make" the market behave. And there is only one place that can lead, socialism/communism, oppression.
Yep…when the elites talk of sustainability, they are talking about THEIR sustainability. We are in an age of Neo-Feudalism.
I didnt say 'wipe your butt with leaves' to be funny, I meant it as a criticism of the standards of the envirowhacks. Who was it that said we should only use one square of toilet paper??? Hmmm??? Im sorry, but that's not sustainable. I have nothing but contempt for the envirowhacks. They dont deserve to be listened to. And any "reasonable" envirowhack who thinks their "arguments" can match the level of intelligence of people who truly do understand economics and enviroment (wildlife management) is SADLY SADLY mistaken. You envirowhacks have BLOWN your intelligence capital with the rest of us by shoving STUPID ideas upon the populace. If you think humans should die and suffer to save Gaia, go do it on a desert island. Leave the rest of us alone!
DAMN, I hate envirowhacks. Communists, all.
Yep, just watch what they're doing now. Preaching sermons while jet-setting around the world, completely oblivious to the environmental impact they create.
When it comes to politicians in general, and modern liberals in particular, don't waste your time listening the hot air coming out of their mouths, watch what they do.
Is that you Ted Danson? Honey, horn-rim glasses dont make you look smarter. Just desperate. Go practice what you preach.
Why dont you demonstrate on yourself what to do with viruses and be the first to take your burdensome carcass off this protesting planet? Go on. Do it. As you and other leftards like to point out, we unwashed grunts in the hinterlands need instruction. I learn by watching.
I wasn't responding to you, either time and don't particularly care what you think.
Your comment was piss poor and wholly lame. YOU do need instruction but I rather doubt you learn at all.
wersefs
When we all drive around in vehicles that make water I'll start to believe you.
Until then, I lean more towards what Agent Smith said about mankind being a virus.
We use up all the natural resources and then move on.
Sorry. I replied to the wrong post.
I read your post and am not too interested in what you have to say.
No thanks.
I hated SS when I was a kid. I never let my kids watch it because I believe the format causes short attention spans in kids. I know very well that a two-year old may not sit down and watch a two-hour movie, but they actually have much longer attention spans than most "experts" think.
I'm not sure how old you are, but I can remember back 30 – 40 years ago and the environment was much worse in those days. One time a river in Cleveland I think actually caught on fire the pollution was that bad. Litter every where, cars pouring black smoke out their tail pipes, dripping old from the motors.
No we have much more efficient cars, lots less pollution, there's regulations on water pollution, I'd be surprised if open discharge into rivers is allowed anywhere in the country.
It's a fallacy of the environmental wackos that the world is getting worse. It is getting worse in nations that are run by dictators. Environmentalism is a luxury only the wealthy can afford. Crushing the economy in the name of making the world cleaner will only make it worse.
Stop listening to the apocalyptic types like Al Gore who are trying to scare the hell out of you so you'll let them do what ever they want in the name of saving the world.
Open your own eyes and look around for your self.
I still want to know why all the product licensing from Sesame Street hasn't paid for the show all along without taxpayer money? Action for Children's Television worked out a sweet deal decades ago, it seems.
You seem to have forgotten this is America. Important topics should be shared by everyone and not just the "scientist" that you would entrust your life to. You sound like a sheeple.
People who actually know what they are doing? That makes a good laugh.
More propaganda
"there's regulations on water pollution, I'd be surprised if open discharge into rivers is allowed anywhere in the country. "
I can go on for an entire day and more on this subject as I deal with such things all the time in my professional life.
I think Al Gore is an idiot.
In fact, there are municipalities all over the country that discharge directly into rivers. San Franciso sewers share sewer and storm and overflow into the bay, which is why it is not a good idea to go swimming there on occasions. The Great Lakes are so nasty you can smell them.
30 to 40 years ago…Hmm, that's when I could catch fish in the stream that is now a dry wash. I could hunt deer only a couple of miles from the house and there was deer!
There is still a trash everywhere problem, cars still smoke and continue to drip oil and we have an island of plastic trash in the Pacific that could cover a large state.
No, I don't believe that the earth is getting better at all, but I'll be damned if I am gonna use a corn cob to wipe my ass.
Where are the white kids in that picture? Did we all of a sudden move from the "one-of-every-race-and-gender" picture template to the "all-but-them-evil-honkies" format?
That's just too bad…I'm being phased out and I thought I'd have at least until Christmas this year.
Funny considering you replied to it.
Yeah, I replied to the wrong post you dolt.
My reply was meant for EdSki, not Sharon and therefore was deleted.
Sharon's comments are lame and ill informed.
Good enough for you to go away now?
That's right, you're a civil engineer, we covered that before.
The area I grew up in used to be home to the largest shoe manufacturing operations in the world Endicott-Johnson Shoes. back in the Back in the 1940's and 50's they were cranking out more than a million pairs of shows, boots and sneakers a week.
And as predictable, there's hazardous waste sites all over the county. Tanning leather is one of the worst processes for the environment. Basically cow hide spent a year in various toxic chemicals, which are then disposed of. They were either dumped into pits or pumped directly into the streams and rivers.
But that stuff is all gone these days. The old sites are being pumped out and sealed up. When I was a kid people on the south side couldn't even dry their wash outside because of the soot from the coal burning plant. Now that's all taken care of with high tech zappers that zap any particle larger than a specific size cleaning the smoke stacks.
I think its part human nature to just automatically assume everything is going to hell. And I despise politicians who take advantage of that.
Mr. Kaiser we've been "making" ourselves stronger and cleaner just fine for almost three hundred years thank you.
You can tell he's a smarty, 'cuz it's all in caps
I'm so stealing that puppets thing.
;^)
I'm not commenting on the rest of the world. But in America in my opinion things are much better. In NY no one is pumping anything directly into the rivers and streams, it all has to be treated. People still hunt deer all over this hills. You don't want to eat any fish out of the river, but that's because of existing pollution that was dumped decades ago. But there are plenty of streams and rivers, including one of the best trout streams in the world, the Beaver Kill.
I'm not saying everything is fine, and no one need worry about anything. I'm just saying its not nearly as bad as Al Gore and his hoods are screaming it is. And its getting better. GE is putting the final touches on a plan to dredge the upper Mid Hudson river to remove PBCs they dumped for years.
As for the rest of the world, I'll reiterate my earlier point: environmentalism is a luxury that only rich societies can afford. You look at the poorest nations on earth, and you see the worst environmental disasters. Think Chernobyl.
If you want a better environment, you need a better economy to pay for it. And every plan the wacko environmentalists are pushing would make this nation poorer. As I learn more about the subject of economics, the more I learn how counter intuitive it is. This is a perfect example if it.
Next they'll have celebs hawking sustainability on Sesame Street too — not just someone like Ed Begley on his own program, but it won't be any of the stars from this list of Top 10 Celebrity Guests on Sesame Street Who Were Abusers, Boozers & Losers. http://www.tvtango.com/news/detail/id/114
Tell me about it. Whether for good or bad, they can remember things forever. Which is why we have to be oh so careful to spell out the F.*.c.k y.o.u's we are tempted to yell out when watching all the liberal c.r.a.p on the b.o.o.b tube whilst we are with them.
A couple of weeks ago I made my nephew – who's been fed the whole hip gamut of said scientific "children's programming" – a simple paper plane and much to the chagrin of his early childhood development consuming mum, he can't wait to go to uncle monkeyfan's place to throw 2 cent paper planes around. There's nothing like running around in the grass to cause a kid to magically lose all interest in turning the TeeVee on or playing with their overly [expensive] rainbow-hued childhood development toys.
Heh, when he turns four I'm gonna buy him a Red Ryder and teach him the joys of safely recycling/shooting old LCD TV's panels. I suspect that Baby Einstein's mum ain't gonna like that either…It might stunt his socialist growth.
Well, I must agree with you on the wacko leftists who measure success in how many snail darters they got to save, instead of the millions who could have adequate electricity.
Algore and his ilk will have wrestled millions out of our economy in an effort to give himself an everlasting name.
His name is infamous now.
And who pushed for those regulations on water pollution? Free market republicans or enviromentalists? Did things just get better all by themselves or were there people working hard to change things?
Sure, the shoe manufacturing stuff is all gone…to China.
Moving a toxic waste stream across the country is not much of a substitution.
It would seem that even having a good economy is not enough to have a better environment. We need a China to make new toxic crap and an India to take the old toxic crap.
So we're in agreement that environmentalist wackos suck. I agree with that as well. The majority of you missed the point. Look at a company like Interface, which is a carpet company. peteee, do you know what carpet's main ingredient is? Oil.
Interface has massive efforts to trim waste and find alternatives to oil. They are doing it to a) save costs b) improve the environment c) be less reliant on terrorists
All are part of sustainability.
Most of you still associate Sustainability with Environmentalist Whacko's and that is not the case.
And I think we all can agree that Sharon really doesnt bring much to the table here. Everyone else at least provides something to think about.
If you think free markets are a republican I idea, you're way off. Free markets are concept originally conceptualized by Adam Smith in the mid 1700's, long before the republicans came along.
I also know its a long standing modern liberal lie that only democrats care about the environment. As a matter of fact, most of the hunters and fishermen I know are conservatives, and they care heck of a lot more about actually doing something than any brain dead liberal or democrat I know. People who actually participate in the environment i.e. sportsmen, understand and support it.
You want to see the difference? Use google images and find pictures of what DC looked like after all the liberals poured into for the President's inauguration and compare those to what it looked like following the tea party protests. The liberals left tons of litter all over the place, the conservatives cleaned up after themselves.
The reason I know longer consider myself a modern liberal is because I stopped listening to the preaching coming out of their mouths, and started paying attention to what they are doing. And in most cases its the exact opposite.
I recycle when ever possible, I avoid polluting things when ever possible, and I have a carbon credit growing in my front year. I refuse to vote democrat.
Al Gore flies around the world telling us we have less than ten years before we all die, spewing pollution every where he goes. Last time he gave a speech that I heard, he had an entire fleet of SUV's to carry around his entourage, he kept them running during the speech to keep the AC's running so Prince Al & Co. have to sweat like us unwashed masses.
You want to waste your life worshiping that pompous hypocrite, be my guest. Leave me the hell out of it.
EdSki, you have some good points. It is some of the same reasons you mentioned that I dont consider myself a Democrat anymore, but rather a Libertarian (social freedom, fiscal conservative).
So instead of just attacking the fringes, wouldnt it make since to promote sustainability for what it is and can be, not what the wackos on the fringes want it to be?
I would love it if there were some other movement that promoted sustainable issues that were good for society as a whole, not just the whacko environmentalists.
But your kids need to be punished – along with the rest of us. How else will they learn that they have too much and shouldn't want more?
I've been researching the archives to see just what the heck went wrong with EJ's, because by all accounts, it was an absolute rousing example of just how great the free markets are.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Endicott_Johnson_Cor...
The story is absolutely phenomenal. The positive combination of labor, capital, management, and society. It was a huge success. So what happened? Here's what I've come up with so far.
Stricter environmental laws (a good thing) left the corp. with hundreds of millions in stranded costs for buildings and machines, that they could no longer use.
His descendants were rich, and weren't interested in running a show company, so sold off their stock to people who sliced and diced it for short term profits.
The invention of synthetic leather – PVC, which gutted half the company that tanned leather.
And yes, cheaper imports.
Still George F. Johnson was indeed a very great man. He demanded a fair day's work for a fair day's wage. Invested his own money into building communities, schools, libraries, hospitals, parks, churches.
Thank you Sir.
I too consider myself much closer to the libertarian banner than republican or conservative.
And we are promoting sustainability. People want to do this, other people want to make profits, so they will meet those desires, and it will all happen at it's own pace, and in the freedom of association that free markets provide, all done peacefully.
That's exactly what the lunatics on the left want to make sure DOES NOT happen. They want it to happen according to their plans, their schedules, and their rules. Which, by the way, happens to include them as total despots and filthy stinking rich. What a coincidence?
My point is it is happening, all around us, just look. Ignore the nut jobs on the left who insist the world is coming to an end, and simply look around, and see it.
Maybe it's just my optimistic nature, but I don't look at the world around me and see impending doom. I see hope.
We're going to get there, but it will happen in its own time. Government attempts to hurry it up will only have the opposite effect. It's why the old adage is true. He who governs least governs best.
You guys are the ones obsessed with Al Gore, not me. I don't know why any discussion of environmental issues turns into a personal referendum on Al Gore.
My point was just that I agree that regulations have cleaned up our water. Who was most responsible for those regulations? The left or the right? I'm sure that sportsmen do care about the environment , but politically speaking who has really championed it? Especially if you want to go back 40 years.
Whoo, that's a lot of rage there, friend. Just making an observation. Sorry it struck a nerve.
Because apparently 50% + 1 of voting Americans insist Al Gore is the environmental messiah. I wish they'd shut up about him and let him fade into obscurity.
But they won't. I have several modern liberal friends, and this is all I get from them. Every time I talk, all I hear about is how Al Gore is going to save the world, and if I don't genuflect at the mention of his name I want to beat and eat raw baby seals. (Which might actually not be that bad.)
If you want to go back 40 years, we're talking Nixon in the white house. And yes, he was probably the most liberal republican to ever hold federal office.
When I look out at my community around me, what I see does not fit with the standard modern liberal legends of democrats = working guy = good, republicans = rich evil corp. = bad. When I look around, I kind of come to the conclusion its the other way around.
I'm sure there's very greedy business people in America, ready to steal anything they can lay their hands on, but there's also workers ready, willing, and able, to do the exact same. Neither the left nor the right has a monopoly on assholes.
I tend to see the politics as the ruling class vs. We The People. And they've been doing everything they can to take as much power as they can (including our money via taxes) as fast and as far as they can. And Al Gore is just another one of them. So yeah, he really pisses me off. He's an example of the worst of them, turning the people against the people, and profiting mightily in the process.
Just another reason to have my kids read. Luckily they never liked SS. After a spin off on "Arthur", "Postcards from Buster" about same sex marriage, my kids have been banned from watching that network. PBS = Propaganda Bull Sh!t.
Ok, well every time I read a thread in here or on other conservative sites about the environment , I read a list of insults towards Al Gore. I sometimes wonder what a reader from 50 years in the future might think: " they are debating important global issues, why are they obsessed with this one politician?"
I agree with you that neither the left nor the right has a monopoly on assholes.
I will repeat my point though , that regulations have cleaned up the environment and they have been largely championed by the left. There's just no getting around that one.
Teddy Roosevelt did pretty good with those parks though.
They may have been championed by the left over the last 50 years or so, but that doesn't mean the left is the ones implementing, or even the only ones calling for it. Assuming that environmentalism is an issue owned by the left is a fallacy.
We all have a stake in air clean enough to breath.
The reason Al Gore is inserted into every environmental debate is because that's what Al Gore does for a living these days.
You seem like a reasonable person, so I'm going to go by that. This is not an insult, but an honest out reach. Are you actually buying into this global warming hoax?
The globe may or may or may not be warming or cooling, but it is changing. It's been changing since dust started collecting around the sun's gravitational pull some 5 billion yeas ago, and it will continue to change until the sun burns out in about 10 billion years. Glaciers from the multiple ice ages have carved the Rockies, the Himalayas, the Great Lakes and the Grand Canyon.
Nature and the climate change. Always have, always will. And quite frankly, humans don't have the science, the technology, or the wisdom to know exactly what's going on. And the ones who tell you they do are lying.
Al Gore's entire spiel is the only possible reason it's happenings is because of humans. The most basic scientific failure is to confuse a correlation with a causal effect.
A correlation is every one who died last year ate carrots at some time in their life. So carrots killed them.
Causal effect is people who drink get drunk, drunks don't have a good record of driving, bad drivers kill pedestrians, so drunk drivers have a greater chance of killing pedestrians.
There's a world of difference between the two.
A casu
"Assuming that environmentalism is an issue owned by the left is a fallacy. "
Well we disagree here. Name me a prominent right wing environmental group, or a major piece of regulation that was championed by the right over the lefts objections.
Yes I think global warming is probably happening. It seems clear that the majority of scientific opinion leans that way.I don't think scientists+politicians from Japan, Germany, etc are basing their opinions on what Al Gore says.I'm sure it's true to some extent that we don't know for sure what will happen, but it seems better to err on the side of caution. I find the theory that this is some kind of marxist plot to take over the world much loonier than global warming. As I remember they had a debate at the CalTech skeptics club a couple years ago, and proponents of global warming won the debate. Those folks are a lot smarter than me , that's for sure.
"Progressives" like the idea of "Sustainability". But only for you.
There is no reason why they can't do all these things they want the rest of us to do. But they can't because of various self-serving reasons.
I hear seal meat is actually unpleasantly greasy.
The guy that owns the costume shop must hate me too. I've never bought a single costume. My goal is always under $5 for a costume, and if I need clothing for it, I go to the thrift shop.
The part you should have focused on was: "Encourage your family to hand out candy made with organic sugar or fair trade chocolate. Natural foods stores will often carry individually wrapped candies including lollipops, chocolates, and toffee. And it's still sweet enough to not get tricked for handing it out." Especially the fair trade chocolate part.
Just what the Public School system needs-to waste money fighting a frivolous lawsuit by a conservative who allows their closed minded politics to shield them from the realities of our damaged environment. Once you've wasted the school system's time and money then you can complain that there isn't any money in your school system's budget for quality education. What is criminal is you not allowing teachers to teach. Maybe you should home school your child, trust me-as a teacher myself, I can tell you we'd rather not deal with a parent like you anyway!
Lame… What is it with you douches that want to take away our cartoons? This is about as ridiculous as that claim that Mighty Mouse was promoting cocaine use to children because he sniffed a flower for a couple of seconds longer than he should have. Sorry, townspeople from "Footloose", but I have some Aqua Teen Hunger Force to catch up in.
Er…lower left? Also, it's clearly cropped so I'm imagining it was edited to fit the webpage.
Chris, you are trying to make a fair point and I can agree with the basic tenets of sustainability.
Here's the problems:
1) If sustainability is profitable, it doesn't need the government or government sponsored television to evangelize for it.
2) If someone says they want to promote sustainability, but are against nuclear power, then I know that they are just an enviro-nazi that is interested in telling me what to do.
I'd like to thank you for the polite, reasonable debate. Something I always missed when dealing with liberals, as their idea of intelligence is how insulting they can be.
I don't normally view politics as left vs. right. I see things I don't like at all on both sides. I view politics as the ruling elite vs. the people. And you have more than enough examples of that on both the left and the right. The only real difference being each side wants to have control over We The People.
To me, the political equation is supremacy of the state over the individual vs. supremacy of the individual over the state. There are numerous examples of political dynasties on both sides of the aisle, i.e. Kennedys and the Bushs. The key – they are always the ones telling us how we will live our lives.
They stay in power, they get richer. We lose freedom and liberty, and we get poorer.
As for me, I think the entire global warming crisis is nothing more than a hoax in order to rob We The People of even more freedom and money. If the House's cap and tax program gets through the Senate, expect to pay around $7,000 – $10,000 more a year for your current standard of living. It's going to affect every aspect of our lives, everything we do, attend, eat, dispose of is going to cost more. And all the government is going to do with that money is buy more votes to ensure they keep their power.
The planet may or may not be getting warmer, or colder, but its been doing that for the last 4.5 billion years. This is nothing new. A couple of reporters did a study that I found on the internet last year. Every 20 – 30 years or so the MSM does this. I'm old enough to remember when they scared the hell out of us in the 1970's with global cooling. The MSM has been doing this at least since the 1870's. First we're all going to burn, when that scare wears off in 30 years, they'll come back with cooling.
The earth is somewhere in the neighborhood of 4.5 billion years old. We humans have been on it for the last 10,000 or so years, as far as civilization goes. I just can't get that narcissistic that we have the ability to destroy the planet.
When Mount Pinatubo went off in the Philippines several years ago, it released more energy than all humans have combined through out all of history. More energy than all bombs in all wars, more than all vehicles, more than all nuclear reactors, more than all furnaces, and all cooking fires.
That's how powerful the earth is, and how weak humans are.
One last point. I'm an engineer, I've taken enough science, physics and calculus classes to know one thing. Any time some one tells you the science is settled, and the debate is over, they aren't talking science, they're talking politics. Because when it comes to science, the debate is never over.
Here's more on the so called "global warming."
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20091111/ap_on_en_tv/u...
Al Gore, once again inserting himself in the conversation by going on TV. NBC to be exact. Which was also the network that broadcast the big global warming concerts last year or the year before. I forget when exactly.
Who owns NBC? GE does. And among other things, what does GE make? They make those CFC light bulbs that the government has ordered us all to start buying. Guess how many billions of dollars that's going to generate for GE?
Your daughter should be afraid. Her parents have run up a huge bill, and are leaving her to pay it off once they're gone. The worst thing you can do now is not even acknowledge that this is the case, as she will just remember you as part of the group who made things worse.
The left wrote 1984.
Hello. I am from the left, and I just thought I would reassure you on something – I have no interest in controlling any aspect of your life. I do however, think that coral reefs, polar ice caps and breathable air are good things and would still like these to be around when my grandchildren are here. Thanks. Any other misconceptions you need clearing up, just let me know.
Fellow Nevadan here, just wondering where you're going to get all that water to cultivate the land here. Isn't that the reason it was never developed in the first place, which is why it's federally owned, because nobody else wanted it? And remember who the feds really are…WE the people.
But heck, I'm just razzin' you. We do need more local agriculture…local food, putting people back to work, and all that. Let's just make sure it's sustainable. Please let's ease off on the chemicals. Compost is king!
Cheers and beers!
Sustainable like a nuclear power plant? I'm down.
Maybe they will move him into a recycling bin……
your caps key got stuck, fyi.
it's not necessarily the left making the money grab, it's mostly free market capitalists (maybe the guy running the Halloween store should look into sustainable business models).
Did people think it was a waste of money to fight for civil rights in the 60's.? How many legal suits have been pursued in the name of political correctness? Now, when it comes to the rights of our children to not be taught in such a way as to provoke nightmares and loss of hope in a future; to insist that both sides of an argument be presented so the children can make up their own minds; to teach in such a way that our children's critical thinking skills are enhanced rather than obliterated–all of a sudden this is just a waste of money?
Maybe if we started teaching our children facts and not conjecture, we would have less need for spending billions of dollars on "disciplinary" measures for when our children become bored/distracted/disinterested in the learning process.
Took me way too long to get back into this one (was having the typical Int. Deb. glitch problems), but it looks like you have handled the debate quite well without the technical jargon I would have tossed in.
<<One last point. I'm an engineer, I've taken enough science, physics and calculus classes to know one thing. Any time some one tells you the science is settled, and the debate is over, they aren't talking science, they're talking politics. Because when it comes to science, the debate is never over. >>
A point that nails that particular argument every time.
To compare spending money on fighting for civil rights to a frivolous lawsuit because of conservative closed mindedness is ridiculous. There is no comparison. The need to live a more environmentally conscious lifestyle is a proven fact. To expect teachers to teach that the environment is stable and the future is bright and rosy all the time because you don't feel it is an important issue is wrong. Like I said before, home school your child if you don't like what is being taught-you seem to feel you know best anyway. If not, then allow teachers to teach and stop whining. The same goes for Sesame Street-if you don't like what is on TV then change the channel, or better yet turn off your television and maybe try reading a book with your child. In all the years I have taught, I have found that half of what a child tells a parent about a lesson in school is exactly that-half of what was taught! Have you tried speaking to your child's teacher before you take as gospel what your child comes home and tells you?
the government doesn't make flu shots. private companies do
Oh please you didn't even address the issue I was putting forth. Why should our children be "scared" into accepting a false-premise that the world is going to end if we don't all go "green?"
Shouldn't teaching both sides of the issue be mandatory? It's called getting an "education" not "indoctrination." Excuse me? I spend thousands of dollars a year to support public education. There is no way I am going to be forced into homeschooling because of people like yourself.
It's funny how you accuse me of the very things your message actually is–closed minded, self-important and prejudiced. you have no idea what my thoughts are on keeping the environment clean. I merely stated that many of the models the Green-Doom and Gloom-Brigade have used in their projections have been PROVEN to be flawed.
So I guess this means you want your children learning flawed data, eh?
And the government tells the private companies exactly how much they can charge for them. President Clinton decided during his first term this would be an excellent chance for political grandstanding via class war fare. He started spouting about how unfair it was to the poor and down trodden that some one should make a profit off the shots, so they rallied the troops, passed a law, and companies have been dropping out of the business ever since.
http://ibiblio.net/pub/academic/medicine/public-h...
http://www.nytimes.com/1994/05/30/us/clinton-crit...
http://www.john-goodman-blog.com/vaccine-%E2%80%9...
You really should spend some time learning the history of all this, because it's coming at you like a run away freight train. And We The People are in the cross hairs.
I did address the issues you put forth-comparing to the civil rights movement-wouldn't that qualify you as being "self-important"? Have you spoken to your child's teacher about your problem with what she is teaching or are you just accepting your child's view of the lesson as fact? Many times children do not get the facts exactly right or take from the lesson only parts of what is being said.This happens with even the smartest child in our classes sometimes. The way to get the most out of the education you are paying for is to keep an open line of communication with yor child's teacher. If you haven't tried that, then you should not be threatening lawsuits. Parents need to take a larger role in their children's education then what one teacher says wouldn't have such a profound impact on your child. I agree that both sides of the story should always be taught-but that means the truth.
See, I wanted to guess lower left as well but that kid giving the thumbs up (and has what apparently looks like vampire teeth) just didn't look "white-devil" enough for me, hahaha
I am reading all these replys, and I am just amazed. Yes , we do have a problem, and yes, certain people paint a doomsday scenario. But we do need to make changes, and they do not need to be drastic. Turning off lights, shorter showers, less driving, etc. The basics seem to go out the window on sustainability. We must reduce what we do and use. Change does not need to be drastic, but if we all did these simple things, a difference can be made. Use our own resources that we have ( if we have oil, don't export, and then import), but we need to make sure we do not destroy the very earth that we need to survive. It's that simple. The power is you, reduce what you do.
ha, i think its funny that you didn't provide any link to actually support your stance. Although I didnt look at all of them, the ones I did check were about integrating economic health with environmental. I don't understand how hard it is for you to see how childish you all sound, like selfish brats unwilling to make any compromise to help ease something that is inevitable, not because "treehuggers" want to make your poor things unhappy (we thrive on the guilt of others you know) but because we are trying to deal with a problem. Just take a look at any of the links you've provided yourself and see that changes need to be made. Why wouldn't we want to let kids take pride in being concientious rather than make them bitter about all the things they could have if only us the damn earth would give us more. you are ridiculous. talk about propoganda.
You must be logged in to post a comment.