BloggeRhythms

Blog writing faded away over the past year, only one entry reaching publication. However, the utterly miserable performance of the current administration spurred posting yesterday of the question as to what voters were thinking who’ve wrought the nation’s current distress upon themselves. The posting must have struck a nerve whereas only a handful of friends were made aware of its existence, yet hundreds of “hits” occurred meaning many readers informed others. So, here’s one more offering.

Reading of my own writing from twelve months past confirmed that every single iota of the damage done primarily by institution of far-left ideology was not only predictable, warnings were readily available to anyone taking the time to read the material back then. And one of the things often mentioned in those pre-election texts was how seemingly focused leftist electoral candidates were on applying community activist Saul Alinsky’s “Rules for Radicals” in their electoral strategy’s.

According to Wikipedia: “The use of common enemy against a community was another theme of Rules for Radicals, as a uniting element in communities.

“Alinsky would find an external antagonist to turn into a "common enemy" for the community within which he was operating. Often, this would be a local politician or agency that had some involvement with activity concerning the community. Once the enemy was established, the community would come together in opposition of it. This management of conflict heightened awareness within the community as to the similarities its members shared as well as what differentiated them from those outside of their organization. The use of conflict also allowed for the goal of the group to be clearly defined. With an established external antagonist, the community's goal would be to defeat that enemy.”

While the election is now over- Democrats gaining governmental control to all extent at the moment- it seems the far left wishes to continue application of Alinsky’s theoretical approach. A glaring example being non-existent “climate change” employing several of his “rules,” such as:

"Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, and polarize it. "

"Keep the pressure on."

"The threat is usually more terrifying than the thing itself."

"Whenever possible go outside the expertise of the enemy."

"The major premise for tactics is the development of operations that will maintain a constant pressure upon the opposition."

 An application of the above elements can be seen today in a Newsmax article by Jeremy Frankel saying:

 “Sen. Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass., is urging U.S. regulators to hold the financial sector accountable, accusing it of being a major contributor to climate change.

“Bloomberg reports that Warren cited a Sierra Club and Center for American Progress study showing that eight of the largest U.S. banks and 10 of the country's largest asset managers finance approximately 2 billion tons of emissions of carbon dioxide combined. 

Warren tweeted Monday: ''The volume of greenhouse gas emitted by the financial-services industry is outrageous. If it were a country it would rank as the fifth-largest emitter in the world. Regulators need to crack down on the financial sector's role in the #ClimateCrisis.''

 “According to the study, continued unrestrained emissions mean that extreme weather events will only become worse and ''efforts to mitigate emissions will only become more challenging and costly.'' The authors of the study urged the Biden administration to take steps such as measuring banks' potential losses due to climate change.

 “Additionally, the Securities and Exchange Commission, as part of the administration's effort to address climate change, plans to propose regulations requiring corporations to publicly release their ''climate risks,'' Bloomberg notes.”

So, here we have a U.S. senator attempting to gain control of major financial institutions because the weather changes and somewhere down the road it might rain, snow, or get too hot or cold at times. Which in this case is even more ridiculous because the institutions Warren refers to don’t even emit the “volume of greenhouse gas“ themselves, particular borrowers and clients do.

And it’s at times like these when El Rushbo is sorely missed whereas he would have had a field day shredding Warren’s overreach of the “climate” myth. Particularly because these major financial institutions can no more affect the weather than he can from his current location.

 That’s it for today folks.

 Adios