I Get Email: “Might Your “Practice What You Preach” Meme Be Getting Old?”

Lisa Q sends me an email, which includes

You write about Warmists practicing what they preach quite a bit, in one form or fashion. While I’m not quite sure which side I believe, don’t you think that the meme has gotten old? It must crop up in almost every post.

Good question, Lisa. Very good question. I’d say that it must crop up, in one form or fashion, in at least 70% of my climate change posts. Every time I write it in some form, whether it be practicing what you preach, noting that Warmists are hypocrites, etc, I think to myself “here we go again”. Yet, I still add it. Why?

I’ve had a JVC receiver since 1987, to go with the same pair of Bose 301 speakers. I had a full boat with a JVC cassette player, CD player, and VCR. Those last three are in the attic. They’ve been retired. Yet, I still use the same receiver. It’s 60 watts per channel, has a fantastic equalizer, lots of inputs and outputs, but none of the really wild modern stuff. It does AM and FM, and I have my TV, BluRay player, and cable box hooked up, along with wireless headphones and a cable to connect to my MP3 player and Android phone. Yet, it is approaching 30 years old. Sheesh. There have been many times when I’ve considered replacing it, even going as far as looking online and at stores like Best Buy and HH Gregg. For the speakers, too. Yet, each time, I do not bother. Why?

It’s an easy answer. It works. It works very, very well. Sound is awesome. I do not need all the other stuff that comes with newer models. I know all the ins and outs of the hookups and how it all works. It’s easy to use. In other words, it’s a classic. At the end of the day, the receiver works awesome.

What does that have to do with my overall “practice what you preach/climahypocrite” meme? At the end of the day, it works. It’s relevant. It makes sense. And it gets to the heart of the “climate change” movement, which is not about science, but about enacting Progressive politics and policies.

I’ve had a Monet reproduction since 1994. I’ve seen it thousands of times. Same with some other paintings (I love beachy stuff). Despite that, they never get old. They work for me. Same with the memes. The memes need to be ridden that much because they are important in understand Warmists and their pseudo-religion. They want Everyone Else to pay the price for their beliefs, yet they won’t do the same in their own lives (whoops, wrote it again). In many cases, they are the worst offenders of “carbon pollution”. They have their memes, which they change up to match the weather, I have mine, which are not changing. Warmists must be exposed.

Save $10 on purchases of $49.99 & up on our Fruit Bouquets at 1800flowers.com. Promo Code: FRUIT49
If you liked my post, feel free to subscribe to my rss feeds.

Both comments and trackbacks are currently closed

14 Responses to “I Get Email: “Might Your “Practice What You Preach” Meme Be Getting Old?””

  1. Jl says:

    The solution to “global warming” by the alarmists/liberals is: more government, more taxes, impeed capitalism, reduce national sovereignty. The solution to the world’s problems if global warming is proved to be a hoax(which it has) and all alarmists/liberals believed it was a hoax, is: more government, more taxes, impeed capitalism, and reduce national sovereignty.

  2. Blick says:

    Hear, Hear, Bravo, Captain. Besides, not buying new stuff is not adding CO2. When Warmists have a lifestyle that acts like warming is serious, get back to me. I have already lived thru the Club of Rome scare in the 1970’s –over population and running out of resources = world collapse by 2000. And Y2K computer world coming to an end scare that ended with a whimper. Global warming based on lies, made up data, bad statistics and bad modeling is just more apocalypse fiction. Until then, long live the Polar Bears, may their tribe increase; inspite of scientist’s wild ass guesses.

  3. Jeffery says:

    Perhaps you should listen to a readers such as Lisa, rather than ignoring them and insulting their intelligence.

    You never have a discussion about so-called “Warmist” hypocrisy. You never present evidence that your slur is remotely true. It’s an assertion on your part without support. A smear. An ad hominem attack.

    Why do you do it? Because it’s effective for the small circle of readers who support your reasoning. But it’s likely you could reach a larger audience by telling the truth and making reasoned arguments.

  4. You never present evidence that your slur is remotely true. It’s an assertion on your part without support. A smear. An ad hominem attack.

    So then you can tell us how you have given up all use if fossil fuels and gone “carbon neutral”, right?

  5. Nighthawk says:

    So then you can tell us how you have given up all use if fossil fuels and gone “carbon neutral”, right?

    Something tells me you won’t get an answer. The best you’ll get is some BS about the 97% of scientists agree. Or that your graph is cherry picked or some other such nonsense to distract from the original question. Such is the way of the warmist.

  6. Jeffery says:

    Teach,

    Like I said, you never present any evidence, you just attack commenters.

    Why do you suggest that my (or others) use of fossil fuels is relevant (and as I’ve pointed out, my fossil fuel use is much below the national average)? If everyone else had my carbon footprint, the US would be spewing half the carbon we now do.

    Please explain your logic behind demanding that only liberals give up fossil fuels to solve a problem that is more your fault than mine?? It would be like liberals demanding that only cowardly, far-right typists go fight the wars they advocate. If you won’t fight in the war you advocate, why should we take you seriously?

    It would be like liberals demanding that conservatives forego all Federal subsidies because they oppose Federal spending. No Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security or tax breaks for you hypocrites! We’ll take you seriously on the deficit once you give up your subsidies. Teach: Can you tell us today that you have not, do not and will not ever accept Federal subsidies from the rest of us taxpayers? Home mortgage deduction? I hope not! Drive on the interstate? No, no, no! Fanny or Freddie loan guarantees? Not today!

    But I understand there is no logic involved. It’s your schtick and you’re schticking to it. Reducing carbon dioxide emissions 50% is not good enough to meet your criteria. Reducing emissions 80% still not good enough. No, only completely giving up fossil fuels will satisfy Mr. Teach. (Even though none of his imaginary opponents advocate eliminating fossil fuels.)

    The Teach Thesis: “President Obama flies in airplanes, proving that global warming is a hoax.”

    The Nighthawk Thesis: ” .”

  7. Like I said, you never present any evidence, you just attack commenters.

    That’s rich coming from you.

    I notice you once again failed to say that you have given up fossil fuels and gone carbon neutral. Weird, that. It’s almost like someone predicted that.

    Please explain your logic behind demanding that only liberals give up fossil fuels to solve a problem that is more your fault than mine??

    I dont see it as a problem. Its an invention of your mind. You deal with it.

  8. john says:

    Teach practice what you preach ? Did you run off to enlist after 9/11? Do you open carry all the time ?
    Going Carbon neutral is a foal but will be impractical for most at this time. BUT we and that includes to also have dropped our carbon pollution down to 2004 levels. Thanks for using those carbon saving light bulbs.

  9. jl says:

    John- thanks for wearing your tinfoil hat.

  10. jl says:

    “It would be like liberals demanding that conservatives forego all Federal subsidies..like Medicade, Medicare, Social Security and tax breaks.” No, it wouldn’t, as J again uses a faulty analogy. We put money into those things, J, so we’re getting back or allowed to keep some of what we put in. And by the way, a “tax break” is not a subsidy, it’s a tax break. Two totally different things. “Because they oppose federal spending.” No one opposes all federal spending, but you knew that.

  11. The Neon Madman says:

    Keep on truckin’, Cap’n. If the trolls are complaining, it must be because it hurts.

  12. Jeffery says:

    Madman,

    “…it must be because it hurts.” Agreed. The willful ignorance and self-pity from Mr. Teach can be painful at times.

  13. Jeffery says:

    j,

    You are always wrong. Maybe you need to rethink your approach.

    Tax breaks ARE subsidies. All the economists agree. Or at least 97%.

    Spin it all you want. But thanks for admitting and trying to defend your hypocrisy.

  14. Jeffery says:

    Teach typed (or had his mom type for him): “I notice you once again failed to say that you have given up fossil fuels and gone carbon neutral.”

    And you failed to say that you have given up Federal subsidies, which is just as relevant as your demand that others give up all fossil fuels.

    The Earth continues to warm from carbon dioxide we’ve added to atmosphere by burning fossil fuels.

Bad Behavior has blocked 8954 access attempts in the last 7 days.