PILOT SPIN
Spin Zone => Spin Zone => Topic started by: Anthony on May 09, 2017, 12:59:12 PM
-
Former President Barack Obama warned the world that more people on the planet were eating meat, causing a dramatic rise in climate emissions.
“As people want to increase meat consumption, that in turn is spiking the growth of greenhouse emissions coming out of the agricultural sector,” Obama said, pointing to countries that were consuming more meat.
The former president shared his views about the growing threat during a conversation about food with his former chef Sam Kass at a food innovation summit in Milan.
“People aren’t as familiar with the impact of cows and methane,” Obama said, adding that “as people want to increase more meat consumption, that in turn is spiking the growth of greenhouse emissions coming out of the agricultural sectors.”
The amount of cows, Obama explained, were contributing to global pollution, alluding to the amounts of methane gas emissions from cow herds.
“No matter what, we are going to see an increase in meat consumption,” Obama said, pointing to developing economies in China, India, Indonesia, and Vietnam. More advanced countries, Obama said, would have to teach people to “have a smaller steak” and explore reductions to their meat consumption.
“What it does mean is that we’re also going to have to find ways to produce protein in a more efficient way,” he said.
Guess Michelle will have to give up her Ribs, Fried Chicken, Burgers..... It ain't going to be pretty Barrack! :)
http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2017/05/09/barack-obama-eating-more-steaks-contributes-to-climate-change/
-
http://www.cc.com/video-clips/bsg719/chappelle-s-show-ribs-sleep-aid
-
http://blog.epicbar.com/myth-buster-cow-farts-destroy-the-ozone/
-
Former president Barack Obama’s speech on climate change in Italy raised €3 million ($3.26m) in ticket sales for his personal foundation, according to a report from The Times.
Having travelled to Milan in a private jet, Obama settled into a presidential suite at the Park Hyatt hotel, costing roughly €8,400 a night. Meanwhile, his entourage of security occupied two separate floors across the hotel, while his security detail required a convoy of 14 cars, a helicopter, and 300 extra police.
The event, which attracted 3500 people paying €850 a ticket, raised nearly €3 million, all of which will go to the Obama Foundation dedicated to “renewal and global progress.”
http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2017/05/09/obama-climate-change-speech-earns-3-26-million-for-personal-foundation/
-
http://www.theamericanmirror.com/obama-talks-216-times-3-million-italy-speech/
If the organizers of the Global Food Innovation Summit paid Barack Obama a reported $3,000,000 to talk about himself, then they definitely got their money’s worth.
During his roughly 100-minute remarks in Milan, Italy, the former U.S. president talked about himself 216 times, according to a count by The American Mirror.
Obama said “I” 168 times, “me” or “my” 40 times, and said “we,” “us” or “our” referring to his family 8 times.
-
Poor little crackhead Barack. He has to actually travel and babble to get enough money to live the lifestyle of a deposed dictator, now.
-
Poor little crackhead Barack. He has to actually travel and babble to get enough money to live the lifestyle of a deposed dictator, now.
When you hobnob with Richard Branson, you've got to have the coin!
Why do mega rich business people become far left kooks? Jeff Bezos, Bill Gates, Branson, Brian Roberts, Igor of Disney, anyone that heads Goldman Sachs, like John Corzine, etc. Is this just the global, elitist, statist cool thing to do?
-
When you hobnob with Richard Branson, you've got to have the coin!
Why do mega rich business people become far left kooks? Jeff Bezos, Bill Gates, Branson, Brian Roberts, Igor of Disney, anyone that heads Goldman Sachs, like John Corzine, etc. Is this just the global, elitist, statist cool thing to do?
I often wonder that. It's such a good question. I have some theories. You would think since many of them got rich via capitalism that they wouldn't be leftist, but then you have to remember a leftist NEVER intends to live by the rules he makes for everyone else.
Theory number 1: Like many people their politics is more a result of their background and social circle, not critical thinking, and they are usually urban, so that would lean them Democrat. Just because they are smart and rich does not necessarily mean they applied the same critical thinking to politics that they applied to their business.
In fact, I have come to believe that BECAUSE celebrities and rich businessmen are so focused on whatever made them rich, they spend their time on that and so have a deficit in other areas. A person has to apply independent thought and intelligence to politics in order to escape the brainwashing of the media. Maybe these people just can't be bothered.
I think this is a big problem with musicians. Extremely good musicians dedicate a lot of their days to making their music. Their music touches our deepest heartstrings. But when musicians apply a political slant to their songs, because they are genius with music, people believe they are also genius with their lyrics. Because of the emotional rapture one feels with the melody, one MISTAKENLY believes the lyrics are equally divinely inspired. I have come to believe that they are NOT. That many musicians, despite their musical talent, are some of the stupidest most ignorant people alive on matters of politics and this is possibly because they are more interested in their music than in learning a lot about other things in the world.
Theory number 2: Situational Acquired Narcissism. Very rich and very famous people over time tend to display symptoms of the personality disorder known as narcissism, but it is not organic so much as a result of their fame. Because everyone else puts them on a pedestal they start to believe it themselves. Like any narcissist, they then have the false belief that their ideas are better than others' and that they know better how to run the world than others. This leads directly to economic collectivism in all its forms, because economic collectivism is about a central authority controlling everybody else. Naturally, like all leftists, they put themselves as part of this authority.
Theory number 3: A bit of inborn narcissism, which may be the very reason they were able to become so rich. This means they are skilled at using people for their own gain. They have no real ideals other than themselves: enriching themselves is their only goal. So their leftism doesn't really have anything to do with real beliefs in the ideal of leftist utopia. These people (born narcissists) see others as existing only to benefit themselves and so their supposed leftism is nothing more than manipulation of others for their own purposes. Example, they don't really want to save the planet for all humanity; they are only talking "green" for whatever gain it brings their own pockets.
These people will also align themselves with whatever group they feel will come out on top, always. Because leftism is always about control, with the leftist on top, they naturally are drawn toward the left. True free market capitalism is a system that respects the intelligence of every individual to manage his own micro-economy. The narcissist isn't capable of granting anyone else any intelligence or wisdom, so might not be able to grasp this concept.