I'M UNSUSTAINABLE, HOW ABOUT YOU?

Some days I think if I see and read the word "sustainable" one more time, I'm going to go into convulsions, throw up, and pass out.  The word has become so ridiculous at this point you could substitute the word "rubbish" and get the same meaning.  It has to be the most used and abused word that ever crossed civilized culture.  

Where did this modern abuse of the word "sustainable" come from?  According to Wikipedia,  it has come from the UN.  That's funny. I thought you had to be a tin foil hat whacko earth hater to believe that.)

The word sustainability is derived from the Latin sustinere (tenere, to hold; sus, up). Dictionaries provide more than ten meanings for sustain, the main ones being to “maintain", "support", or "endure.”

However, since the 1980s sustainability has been used more in the sense of human sustainability on planet Earth and this has resulted in the most widely quoted definition of sustainability as a part of the concept sustainable development, that of the Brundtland Commission of the United Nations on March 20, 1987: “sustainable development is development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs.

See, we're not so crazy after all.  Even Wikipedia agrees.

So the definition is something about "meeting the needs of the present without compromising future generations to meet their own needs."  Boy, now there is a stretch.  I read someone else the other day (can't remember who exactly) mentioning that if the people of the 1800's were worried about using whale oil for lanterns because some future generation might need that whale oil, we would still be in the dark.  Extrapolating from there, if someone else in the future wants the land I live on, I should not build on this land for fear of disrupting some future use of it that I can't predict.  I dare not take down a tree for wood to build a house.  Some future unknown human being might want that tree for themselves.  OR...some woodsie owl might live in that tree someday, so I'd better not even think about using it.  This way, the land and the tree will endure forever.  Right?  Oh, wait.  What if there is an earthquake or flood?  Or the tree grows old and dies someday?  Anyone thought of that?  Even woodsie owl has a time limit.

I wonder if the American Indians thought that about buffalo hides.  Heaven knows they killed off hundreds of thousands of the buffalo over centuries to sustain themselves.  But maybe I shouldn't bring up the American Indians because that would be a politically protected indigenous group and one must not deride anything about them or their past practices.  Those tepees they lived in were made of animal hides.  Guess they weren't sustainable either.  

According to the "sustainabilists" nothing humans do is "sustainable" in any way that makes human life worthy of living.  Unless you are a "sustainabilist" and you are preaching about "sustainability" while riding your bicycle to the green building you work in, the one with the turf roof, solar panels and the windmill." Then you might be O.K.  If you are that person, you have given yourself permission to live.  After all, the "sustainabilist" knows how to down-size, do penance, and pretend his or her bicycle is made of cotton candy that will dissolve in the next rain.  Oh, but even then, that might pollute the rivers, so I guess that wouldn't work either.  What really is "sustainable?"

Ownership of anything is not "sustainable" these days.  You can't own anything because it might interfere with the needs of future generations.  Unless you are the government.  Then you can own anything and everything.  That would qualify as "sustainable" because you know the government is definitely going to make sure future generations have their needs met.  Sure, that's the ticket to paradise.

Meanwhile, from the minute I was born I was destined to die, leaving room for future generations.  Wait a minute.  I thought "sustainable" meant something would endure... and endure... and endure some more.  Hmmm....getting a bit confusing now.  Guess that "sustainable" doesn't apply to me.  I'm definitely not "sustainable."  And neither are you. 

Wonder if the wordsmiths will think of a new word to replace "sustainable" when they figure out the word they are using isn't "sustainable" either.  Bet they will.  They always do!

I think I must be channeling Andy Rooney tonight...I suddenly thought this little essay sounded like him.  Oh, I almost forgot, Andy Rooney isn't here anymore either.  Not "sustainable."  And here comes December 2012.  Bet that won't be "sustainable."  It will only last 31 days and we have to figure out what to do with  January 2013.

I'll be sure to turn out the lights before I go to bed....to dream of ....not sure what to dream of.  Nothing I dream would be "sustainable" enough.   Goodnight all!

HITTING THE ACCELERATOR - OBAMA SIGNS ANOTHER EXECUTIVE ORDER

As the nation was trying to get a handle on the Republican ticket, Obama signed yet another executive order to choke off your energy use.  Last Thursday, as Romney and Ryan were accepting the nomination of the Republican Party, Barack Obama did it again.  The guy can't help it.  He is a relentless obsessive / compulsive destroyer...you have to give him credit for that.

The order, which aims to increase the number of cogeneration plants in the U.S. by 50 percent by 2020 and slash carbon emissions by 150 million tons per year, is the administration’s latest effort to “deploy cleaner and more efficient energy production in the country by working around political resistance to climate change and ‘green’ energy legislation on Capitol Hill,” Reuters reports.

Notice the words, "working around political resistance to climate change and green energy."  C'mon, folks.  How long does it take to figure out what these jerks are doing to us?  Political resistance?  I wish we had "political resistance."  Where is that?  I don't see people standing up to this imperial tyrant.  Do you?  Congress?  What Congress?  Do we even have that anymore?   

No one with half a brain believes the climate change lies anymore.  And everyone with half a brain knows "green energy" is a bank busting failure and not worth one taxpayer penny spent for wind or solar. And yet we see press release after press release that our nation is borrowing more money for "green energy."  Political resistance? Where is it?    

And as Bill Clinton takes the stage tonight at the DNC, I am reminded of the executive order he signed creating the "President's Council on Sustainable Development."  To be honest, the public was out of the loop on that one.  Who knew?  Well, now we do know and we don't want that either, thank you very much.  How much damage can these guys do with executive orders?  Billions?  Try Trillions!  

Yep, 20,000 people crowding into the Bobcat Arena in Charlotte tonight to watch the Clinton buffoon pat himself on the back, all the while his nice little executive order still picks the pockets of every American for a lying boondoggle of an unconstitutional scam. The Clinton buffoon will slightly nod to the O racketeer who doubled down on the "President's Council on Sustainable Development" by creating another executive order establishing a partnership between HUD, DOT, and the EPA called "Sustainable Communities Initiative."  Two peas in a pod, these two shysters.  Soaking you and smiling to the crowds at the same time.

Adding icing to the moronic cake, the Democrat National Platform includes this lovely tribute to "Environmental Justice."  Breitbart reports:

“We know that global climate change is one of the biggest threats of this generation – an economic, environmental, and national security catastrophe in the making,” the platform reads. “We affirm the science of climate change, commit to significantly reducing the pollution that causes climate change, and know we have to meet this challenge by driving smart policies that lead to greater growth in clean energy generation and result in a range of economic and social benefits.”

According to the platform, climate change also disproportionately impacts the poor and thus more commitments to “environmental justice” are needed.

Political resistance?  Bring it on.  I haven't seen it yet.

Still waiting.