Tuesday, December 16, 2014

Rebuttal to Skeptical Science’s Claimed Climate Myths by John Christy

Over at skeptical science they have a hard on for John Christy because he does not agree with their alarmism regarding the Global Warming Hoax.  Here I rebut each of the issues that they take him to task for.
Climate myths by Christy in quotes with what they say the Science Says without quotes.  My comments in bold:
“CO2 limits will make little difference” If every nation agrees to limit CO2 emissions, we can achieve significant cuts on a global scale.
Humans contribute less than 3% of the increase in atmospheric co2, there would be no significant cuts if all human output as stopped.
“It’s Urban Heat Island effect”     Urban and rural regions show the same warming trend.
There has been no trend for over 18 years.
“CO2 limits will harm the economy”     The benefits of a price on carbon outweigh the costs several times over.
The benefits they calculated seems to be based upon  tax subsidies, tax on carbon, and do not consider the huge increase in the cost of renewable energy as compared to fossil fuel.
“Models are unreliable”   Models successfully reproduce temperatures since 1900 globally, by land, in the air and the ocean.
They say. “Climate models have to be tested to find out if they work. We can’t wait for 30 years to see if a model is any good or not; models are tested against the past, against what we know happened. If a model can correctly predict trends from a starting point somewhere in the past, we could expect it to predict with reasonable certainty what might happen in the future.”  
None of the  models predicted the pause, and not one of them track what has been happening for the past 18 years and counting.  “We can’t wait for 30 years” well we have waited nearly 20 years with no increase in spite of the continual growth in the co2 that we are add to the atmosphere every one of those years.
“Extreme weather isn’t caused by global warming” Extreme weather events are being made more frequent and worse by global warming.
Here’s what the IPCC says:
Current data sets indicate no significant observed trends in global tropical cyclone frequency over the past century and it remains uncertain whether any reported long-term increases in tropical cyclone frequency are robust, after accounting for past changes in observing capabilities.… No robust trends in annual numbers of tropical storms, hurricanes and major hurricanes counts have been identified over the past 100 years in the North Atlantic basin.
“CO2 limits will hurt the poor” Those who contribute the least greenhouse gases will be most impacted by climate change.
In my opinion this is on part what the whole Global Warming Hoax is all about, a giant wealth transfer from America to all the Third World Countries.
“It’s not us”  Multiple sets of independent observations find a human fingerprint on climate change.
I will only address one of their so called fingerprints, “Humans are currently emitting around 30 billion tonnes of CO2 into the atmosphere.”  CO2 is only .04 percent of the atmosphere in total, and humans only produce about 6% of all CO2 emissions in a given year. Then consider that at no point in history has CO2 ever been known to be static, and in the past it rise has always followed temperatures rise by about 800 years. 

The question thus eases in my mind is if co2 is driving the temperature increase why have there been no increase in temperature since 1996 when the co2 was around 358 ppm, now it is round 400 ppm but the temperature has stayed statically flat. 
“It’s not urgent” A large amount of warming is delayed, and if we don’t act now we could pass tipping points.
How do you delay heat?  The sun heats the earth in the same manner as an oven heats the food in it, by radiated energy.  The heat generated by the sun can no more be delayed in heating up the earth that the heat being generated in an oven can be delayed in the duck you are cooking.  As soon as you turn off the heat the oven starts to cool.  Open the door and it will cool faster by heating up the kitchen, the heat is not stored and cannot re-enter the oven to cook with at a later time.
The alarmist have put forth the idea  that the heat is being stored in the oceans, but have not offered a mechanism with which it could be moved from the surface to the depths.  See warm water is lighter than cold water because it is less dense due to the expansion of it molecules as it is heated up, as a results the oceans are divided into layers with the warmer being on top, the top layer can only sink to the bottom when it is carried to the poles and gets colder than the water it is sitting on, and then it sinks to the bottom only to come up again to replace the water being sent north with the Gulf Stream.
“Arctic sea ice loss is matched by Antarctic sea ice gain”    Arctic sea ice loss is three times greater than Antarctic sea ice gain.
Not any more In fact it is starting to increase: “Sea ice extent in November averaged 10.36 million square kilometers (4.00 million square miles). This is 630,000 square kilometers (243,000 square miles) below the 1981 to 2010 long-term average of 10.99 million square kilometers (4.24 million square miles) and 520,000 square kilometers (201,000 square miles) above the record low for the month observed in 2006.” Arctic sea ice conditions.
“Temp record is unreliable”  The warming trend is the same in rural and urban areas, measured by thermometers and satellites.
Again, there has been no trend for 18+ years.
 “Earth hasn’t warmed as much as expected” This argument ignores the cooling effect of aerosols and the planet’s thermal inertia.
No, it points much more to the inability of any of the models to predict what the warming rate will be.  If the cooling effect of aerosols and the planet’s thermal inertia are things that affect temperature they should have been taken into account when constructing the models that predicted the future temperature.  Instead they locked stepped the models with the rise in co2, which has not stopped, to the predicted rise in temperature which has stopped.
“Satellites show no warming in the troposphere”    The most recent satellite data show that the earth as a whole is warming.
For September 2014, the latest data I can find,  the UAH lower troposphere temperature anomaly is +0.30 deg C.  It rose (an increase of about +0.10 deg C) since August 2014.  Well, I reckon that you can count that as a little warming, but what caused it is an open question.
The annual mean time series is shown in Fig. 1. It starts at the beginning of the modern satellite era, in 1979. This is in stark contrast to the global mean near-surface temperature that can be reasonably accurately reconstructed to the end of the 19th century. The short record is one of the reasons it is not used much in climate science.
The annual mean time series is shown in Fig. 1. It starts at the beginning of the modern satellite era, in 1979. This is in stark contrast to the global mean near-surface temperature that can be reasonably accurately reconstructed to the end of the 19th century. The short record is one of the reasons it is not used much in climate science.
The global mean TLT differs from the global mean near-surface temperature in a few key aspects. One of them is that the influence of El Niño is much larger, as can be seen from, e.g., the height of the peak in 1998, which is about 0.4 K above the trend line, against about 0.2 K in the near-surface temperature. Note that strongest effects of El Niño on temperature lag the event itself by about half a year. The 2010 peak is also higher, about 0.2 K versus only 0.1 K. On a map, this can be seen as a stronger and broader response to El Niño and La Niña in the tropics, see Fig. 2. The amplification can easily be understood due to the stronger warming at height caused by the heat of condensation of the higher rainfall. This is the upper tropospheric warming that accompanies an increase in SST in the tropics. In the deep tropics, near the equator, this causes heating well above the lower troposphere and hence is not clearly visible in the TLT, but away from the equator the warmer air descends in the Hadley circulation and enters the heights to which the TLT is more sensitive.  Climate Lab Book
“Climate sensitivity is low”  Net positive feedback is confirmed by many different lines of evidence.
There are two ways of working out what climate sensitivity is. The first method is by modelling:  Climate models have predicted the least temperature rise would be on average 1.65°C (2.97°F) , but upper estimates vary a lot, averaging 5.2°C (9.36°F). Current best estimates are for a rise of around 3°C (5.4°F), with a likely maximum of 4.5°C (8.1°F).
The second method calculates climate sensitivity directly from physical evidence, by looking at climate changes in the distant past:
The first method went to hell in a handbasket 18 years ago, and the problem with the second method is that in the past the rise in co2 lagged the rise in temperature on an average of 800 years. 
Ice cores from Antarctica show that at the end of recent ice ages, the concentration of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere usually started to rise only after temperatures had begun to climb. There is uncertainty about the timings, partly because the air trapped in the cores is younger than the ice, but it appears the lags might sometimes have been 800 years or more. Newscientist.com
“There’s no tropospheric hot spot”      We see a clear “short-term hot spot” – there’s various evidence for a “long-term hot spot”.
The (missing) tropical hot spot is one of the long-standing controversies in climate science. Climate models show amplified warming high in the tropical troposphere due to greenhouse forcing. However data from satellites and weather balloons don’t show much amplification. What to make of this? Have the models been ‘falsified’ as critics say or are the errors in the data so large that we cannot conclude much at all? And does it matter if there is no hot spot?  Summaries online:
skepticalscience.com has this to say:
What does the full body of evidence tell us? We have satellite data plus weather balloon measurements of temperature and wind strength. The three satellite records from UAH, RSS and UWA give varied results. UAH show tropospheric trends less than surface warming, RSS are roughly the same and UWA show a hot spot. The difference between the three is how they adjust for effects like decaying satellite orbits. The conclusion from the U.S. Climate Change Science Program (co-authored by UAH’s John Christy) is the most likely explanation for the discrepancy between model and satellite observations is measurement uncertainty.
And what does that tell me?  It tells me that  whether or not there is a tropospheric hot spot is an open question.
“It’s microsite influences” Microsite influences on temperature changes are minimal; good and bad sites show the same trend.
Again, for the third time, there has been been no trend for 18+ years.
“It warmed before 1940 when CO2 was low” Early 20th century warming is due to several causes, including rising CO2.
From skepticalscience.com
Before 1940, the increase in temperature is believed to have been caused mainly by two factors: 
Increasing solar activity; and Low volcanic activity (as eruptions can have a cooling effect by blocking out the sun).
Other factors, including greenhouse gases, also contributed to the warming and regional factors played a significant role in increasing temperatures in some regions, most notably changes in ocean currents which led to warmer-than-average sea temperatures in the North Atlantic. Does this mean that solar activity is also primarily responsible for late 20th century warming? In short, no. Solar activity since the 1950s has been relatively stable and therefore cannot explain recent trends. Similarly, increased volcanic activity may actually have had a cooling effect in recent decades. On the other hand, greenhouse gas concentrations, which were relatively low pre-1940, have increased considerably and are now dominating the climate system. This highlights the need to look at all factors when determining which factors are likely to be affecting climate at any one time. 
In short, there’s no reason to assume that because the sun was responsible for early 20th century, it is responsible for all warming. The evidence strongly suggests that current warming is mainly the result of increasing greenhouse gas levels.
The disallowance of the sun as cause of the earth’s warming for the last fifty years seems a bit self serving to me, and there is no reason not to assume that the sun was not responsible.  The only evidence that suggests the current warming is mainly the result of increasing greenhouse gas levels is one of correlation which stopped 18+ years ago.
“CO2 was higher in the past” When CO2 was higher in the past, the sun was cooler.
Yes, and the co2 did not start increasing until after the earth warmed!
From skepticalscience.com
Another important factor is the sun. During the Ordovician, it would have been several percent dimmer according to established nuclear models of main sequence stars. Surprisingly, this raises the CO2 threshold for glaciation to a staggering 3000 ppmv or so. This also explains (along with the logarithmic forcing effect of CO2) why a runaway greenhouse didn’t occur: with a dimmer sun, high CO2 is necessary to stop the Earth freezing over.
Stellar evolution is not studied by observing the life of a single star, as most stellar changes occur too slowly to be detected, even over many centuries. Instead, astrophysicists come to understand how stars evolve by observing numerous stars at various points in their lifetime, and by simulating stellar structure using computer models.   A lot of assumptions go into these model, just like the ones used to model climate.   One false assumption, like temperature is driven by co2, and the whole model falls apart.  Unlike with climate models  which is in the process of being falsified, they cannot be tested except by observation and opinions.  Outside of faith there is no way of knowing if the syn was warmer or cooler way back then.
“CO2 is plant food” The effects of enhanced CO2 on terrestrial plants are variable and complex and dependent on numerous factors.
One of the most consistent effects of elevated atmospheric CO2 on plants is an increase in the rate of photosynthetic carbon fixation by leaves. Across a range of FACE experiments, with a variety of plant species, growth of plants at elevated CO2 concentrations of 475–600 ppm increases leaf photosynthetic rates by an average of 40% (Ainsworth & Rogers 2007). Carbon dioxide concentrations are also important in regulating the openness of stomata, pores through which plants exchange gasses, with the external environment. Open stomata allow CO2 to diffuse into leaves for photosynthesis, but also provide a pathway for water to diffuse out of leaves. Plants therefore regulate the degree of stomatal opening (related to a measure known as stomatal conductance) as a compromise between the goals of maintaining high rates of photosynthesis and low rates of water loss. As CO2 concentrations increase, plants can maintain high photosynthetic rates with relatively low stomatal conductance. Across a variety of FACE experiments, growth under elevated CO2 decreases stomatal conductance of water by an average of 22% (Ainsworth & Rogers 2007). This would be expected to decrease overall plant water use, although the magnitude of the overall effect of CO2 will depend on how it affects other determinants of plant water use, such as plant size, morphology, and leaf temperature. Overall, FACE experiments show decreases in whole plant water use of 5–20% under elevated CO2. This in turn can have consequences for the hydrological cycle of entire ecosystems, with soil moisture levels and runoff both increasing under elevated CO2 (Leakey et al. 2009).
It looks like a good response to me.
And lastly: Hansen’s 1988 prediction was wrong” Jim Hansen had several possible scenarios; his mid-level scenario B was right.
‘On June 23, 1988, NASA scientist James Hansen testified before the House of Representatives that there was a strong “cause and effect relationship” between observed temperatures and human emissions into the atmosphere. At that time, Hansen also produced a model of the future behavior of the globe’s temperature, which he had turned into a video movie that was heavily shopped in Congress. That model predicted that global temperature between 1988 and 1997 would rise by 0.45°C (Figure 1). Ground-based temperatures from the IPCC show a rise of 0.11°C, or more than four times less than Hansen predicted. The forecast made in 1988 was an astounding failure, and IPCC’s 1990 statement about the realistic nature of these projections was simply wrong.’ (Pat Michaels)
And give this graph:
 What do we learn from James Hansen's 1988 prediction? Link to this page What the science says... Select a level...  Basic    Intermediate    Advanced   Hansen's 1988 results are evidence that the actual climate sensitivity is about 3°C for a doubling of atmospheric CO2. Climate Myth... Hansen's 1988 prediction was wrong 'On June 23, 1988, NASA scientist James Hansen testified before the House of Representatives that there was a strong "cause and effect relationship" between observed temperatures and human emissions into the atmosphere. At that time, Hansen also produced a model of the future behavior of the globe’s temperature, which he had turned into a video movie that was heavily shopped in Congress. That model predicted that global temperature between 1988 and 1997 would rise by 0.45°C (Figure 1). Ground-based temperatures from the IPCC show a rise of 0.11°C, or more than four times less than Hansen predicted. The forecast made in 1988 was an astounding failure, and IPCC’s 1990 statement about the realistic nature of these projections was simply wrong.' (Pat Michaels) In 1988, James Hansen projected future warming trends. He used 3 different scenarios, identified as A, B, and C. Each represented different levels of greenhouse gas emissions.  Scenario A assumed greenhouse gas emissions would continue to accelerate.  Scenario B assumed a slowing and eventually constant rate of growth. Scenario C assumed a rapid decline in greenhouse gas emissions around the year 2000.  The actual greenhouse gas emissions since 1988 have been closest to Scenario B. As shown below, the actual warming has been less than Scenario B.

What do we learn from James Hansen’s 1988 prediction?
Link to this page
What the science says…
Select a level… Basic Intermediate Advanced
Hansen’s 1988 results are evidence that the actual climate sensitivity is about 3°C for a doubling of atmospheric CO2.
Climate Myth…
Hansen’s 1988 prediction was wrong
‘On June 23, 1988, NASA scientist James Hansen testified before the House of Representatives that there was a strong “cause and effect relationship” between observed temperatures and human emissions into the atmosphere. At that time, Hansen also produced a model of the future behavior of the globe’s temperature, which he had turned into a video movie that was heavily shopped in Congress. That model predicted that global temperature between 1988 and 1997 would rise by 0.45°C (Figure 1). Ground-based temperatures from the IPCC show a rise of 0.11°C, or more than four times less than Hansen predicted. The forecast made in 1988 was an astounding failure, and IPCC’s 1990 statement about the realistic nature of these projections was simply wrong.’ (Pat Michaels)
In 1988, James Hansen projected future warming trends. He used 3 different scenarios, identified as A, B, and C. Each represented different levels of greenhouse gas emissions. Scenario A assumed greenhouse gas emissions would continue to accelerate. Scenario B assumed a slowing and eventually constant rate of growth. Scenario C assumed a rapid decline in greenhouse gas emissions around the year 2000. The actual greenhouse gas emissions since 1988 have been closest to Scenario B. As shown below, the actual warming has been less than Scenario B.
As you can see  his  closest prediction to the actual rise in temperature is with Scenario C which assumed a rapid decline in greenhouse gas emissions around the year 2000 when in fact the co2 level continued to rise to near 400 ppm.  None of his prediction foresaw the pause!

Monday, December 1, 2014

The Hoax of White Guilt

From the White Guilt Department:
“Oliver Friedfeld, a senior at Georgetown University (GU) and his roommate were recently mugged at gun point — but Frieldfeld says he deserved it because of his “privilege.” In an oped for the GU newspaper, The Hoya, Friedfeld wrote that he “can hardly blame” the assailants for robbing him. He argued that income inequality is to blame for the incident. “Who am I to stand from my perch of privilege, surrounded by million-dollar homes and paying for a $60,000 education, to condemn these young men as ‘thugs?’ It’s precisely this kind of ‘otherization’ that fuels the problem,” Friedfeld wrote.
Whom whence does this “White Guilt” originate? The finger is pointed to the fact that white people imported into America many black people to be sold as slaves. True enough, but the narrative leaves out the fact that virtually every one of those black people were sold to the slavers by other blacks who had captured them in their raids upon other tribe, and before they started selling them all of their heads were cut off in a yearly celebration.
“This singular short tart claim, that “We sold each other into slavery”, has maintained in a state of continual flux our historical basis for Black-on-Black self love and mutual cooperation at the level of Class. Even if it is true (without further clarification) that we sold each other into slavery, this should not absolve Whites of their responsibility in our subjugation. We will deal with Africa if need be.”  40 ACRES AND A MULE
Another thing that the narrative leaves out is the fact that Up to 2/3 of the original whites were brought to America as slaves by English. These individuals weren’t“Indentured Servants” but people held against their own will. People were enslaved by the English for being poor, vagrants, criminals, orphaned. Most of the slaves were Irish brought here in chains at the same exact time in History as Africans. The English enslaved mainly Irish, Scottish, and English people. A good percentage of these individuals died in slavery on the ship ride to America, being overworked, diseases, starvation, beatings, murder, and other horrible untold things. The slaver masters abused white slaves worse than blacks as the white slaves were expendable (blacks were much more expensive both in price and to take care of). Whites were also expected to do harder labor than blacks. Young white slave boys children, were often used as “human brooms” while cleaning chimneys, and died working. From Truth is hatespeech:
They do not want to tell you that the first slave owner in America was a black man, nor that 25% (or highet) of freed black men went on to own slave in the Antebellum South. In 1860, only a small minority of whites owned slaves. That year’s census also shows that there were fewer than 385,000 individuals who owned slaves. Even if all slaveholders had been white, that would amount to only 1.4 percent of whites in the country or 4.8 percent of southern whites owning one or more slaves. Now all of us descendants of none slaveholder are to suffer and carry “White Guilt” for that small percentage of the population way back then back then?
Well, why don’t black need to shoulder some of this guilt as well? In 1860 there were nearly 4.5 million Negroes in the United States, with fewer than four million of them living in the southern slaveholding states. Of the blacks residing in the South, 261,988 were not slaves. Of this number, 10,689 lived in New Orleans. The country’s leading African American historian, Duke University professor John Hope Franklin, records that in New Orleans over 3,000 free Negroes owned slaves or 28 percent of the free Negroes in that city. 28 percent is certainly impressive when compared to less than 1.4 percent of all American whites and less than 4.8 percent of southern whites. There were at least six Negroes in Louisiana who owned 65 or more slaves The largest number, 152 slaves, were owned by the widow C. Richards and her son P.C. Richards, who owned a large sugar cane plantation. Another Negro slave magnate in Louisiana, with over 100 slaves, was Antoine Dubuclet, a sugar planter whose estate was valued at (in 1860 dollars) $264,000. That year,1860, the mean wealth of southern white men was $3,978.
Shelby Steele’s analysis of “white guilt” in his book by the same name writes of the deleterious effects of this guilt, which results in holding blacks to lower standards than whites. I reckon if this is what white guilt manifests then Oliver Friedfeld has a bad case of it. The racism of low expectations.
The black slaveowners stats were taken from this link:

Update: 12/5/2014
There is some question as to whether Oliver Friedfeld,  and his roommate were mugged at gun point at all:
No police report exists with the Washington DC police of the campus police. This an other inconsistencies in story suggest Marxist activist Oliver Friedfeld lied about being mugged. Friedfeld says he was interviewed by a reporter. He never mentions the reporters name, who the reporter worked for, or how the reporter found out about the mugging. To date, the alleged interviewed has never appeared in anything. Only Friedfeld Marxist diatribe was published, not any interview. The only thing that can be confirmed is that there is an OLIVER MICHAEL FRIEDFELD attending Georgetown University.    http://topconservativenews.com/
This is all I know, I will post further update as more information comes to light.  If it was indeed a hoax what is the hoaxer’s motive? Was it to promote the idea of white guilt and how whites should turn a blind eye to any and all black’s transgression?  Or was it to discredit the people, like me, who hold that the true hoax is the concept that the whites of today bear any guilt at all for what some white people did in America in the past.

Hoax or not it does not invalidate any of the opinions and facts I expressed above.

Tuesday, November 25, 2014

Ferguson, Missouri City Government Elected by Black Apathy

Good morning to a riotous day (pun intended), so the message is, do it our way or we will burn your world down. Ua, well not your world but ours, it was all black-owned businesses that the punks burnt last night. If this is as Democratic Missouri State Sen. Maria Chappelle-Nadali said on MSNBC’s “The Last Word with Lawrence O’Donnell, “As it was said earlier today, and because of the systematic racism that we have in our state government, and our state party, and we do not bring the truth to bear, then we will not recover from what we are going on. What we are experiencing right now, and I have to tell you, this is St. Louis’s race war. We didn’t have a race war like other cities throughout the this is our race war. country. and people have to be open, and they have to be honest. and they have to earnest, and they have not been earnest for decades…” The war is black against black, with the cops trying to protect black property, at leas that is the picture painted last night.

The Democrats chickens are coming home to roost, for decades and decades they have been building up the black welfare class into a dependent class, dependent upon the government for its substance in return for their near 100 percent turnout of all who go to vote, but depending upon welfare has a price:

“Black unemployment is three times that of white unemployment,” Lou Dobbs said on Aug. 19’s America’s Newsroom. “The community itself has a 13 percent unemployment rate, more than double that of the national average. The household net worth in that community is $10,000, a third less than the national average.”

As of the census of 2010, there were 21,203 people in Ferguson, the racial makeup of the city was 29.3% White, 67.4% African American, 0.4% Native American, 0.5% Asian, 0.4% from other races, and 2.0% from two or more races. Hispanic or Latino of any race were 1.2% of the population. Yet Ferguson has a near total white government, five of its six city council members are white, as is its mayor, why? Had they a mind to they could have voted in a whole black city government and had all black policemen. They are not forced to vote for white but during local elections last April, just 1,484 of the 12,096 registered voters in Ferguson cast ballots.

I read that more than 3,000 people have registered to vote in Ferguson, Mo., since the death of Michael Brown, that bright the total of registered to about 15,100 voters, had they truly wanted to change things in Ferguson they could have done so at the poles a long time ago, and since the next election is a presidential election the Obama Phone voters may get out and bother to vote for a city government of their liking. Don’t lay odds on it.

May the Lord God IAUA bless us with enough this day.

Monday, November 24, 2014

A Rednecks Response to “White Privilege: Unpacking the Invisible Knapsack”

I decided to try to work on myself at least by identifying some of the daily effects of white privilege in my life. I have chosen those conditions that I think in my case attach somewhat more to skin-color privilege than to class, religion, ethnic status, or geographic location, though of course all these other factors are intricately intertwined. As far as I can tell, my African American coworkers, friends, and acquaintances with whom I come into daily or frequent contact in this particular time, place and time of work cannot count on most of these conditions.
From White Privilege: Unpacking the Invisible Knapsack  by Peggy McIntosh, my responses will be in red.
I can if I wish arrange to be in the company of people of my race most of the time. Black do this as well, in schools, and in public meeting, kind like kind. 
  1. I can avoid spending time with people whom I was trained to mistrust and who have learned to mistrust my kind or me. I know no one who has been trained mistrust anyone, she must be speaking for herself.
  1. If I should need to move, I can be pretty sure of renting or purchasing housing in an area which I can afford and in which I would want to live. I cannot do that, I nee five acres at least and room for horses.
  1. I can be pretty sure that my neighbors in such a location will be neutral or pleasant to me. This is bullshit, getting a good neighbor is the luck of the draw. I have numerous black neighbors who are as welcome as any whites. I do have one black neighbor down the street that bought a house with at least a $150K barn on it next to the house.  Shortly after he moved in it burn down, he blamed it on racist neighbors who did not like having a black living there.  The insurance paid out, and he rebuilt a little $5K, at best, storage building.  He has had no further incidents of racist behavior since then, and still lives there 5-6 years latter..  Had I wanted him gone, it would have been his house I would have burnt, not an empty barn!  Draw your own conclusions.
I can go shopping alone most of the time, pretty well assured that I will not be followed or harassed. I see black in                  this part of the world going about their business along or otherwise without being 
           I see black in this part of the world going about their business along or otherwise without being harassed. she must            live in a different neighborhood than me.
  1. I can turn on the television or open to the front page of the paper and see people of my race widely represented. Now this too is a reflection of a different age that Progressives/liberal like to ignore.  You cannot watch a news channel. sitcom, movie, or even a commercial that do not have blacks in them.  And it is getting as though it is obligatory to have gueers in as the new shows as well.
  1. When I am told about our national heritage or about “civilization,” I am shown that people of my color made it what it is. For the most part, this is true in the New World, and in in Europe, like it or not.
  1. I can be sure that my children will be given curricular materials that testify to the existence of their race.  What the hell does that mean?  She lost me there.
  1. If I want to, I can be pretty sure of finding a publisher for this piece on white privilege. I sure wish that I could get published as easily.  I have to self-publish.
  1. I can be pretty sure of having my voice heard in a group in which I am the only member of my race. Sometimes true, sometimes not, let he fo to Ferguson and try telling the black there that they should abide by the juries decision and  not riot, that Officer Darren Wilson deserves due process and if it is found that he acted accordingly he should be allowed to live his life in peace. 
  1. I can be casual about whether or not to listen to another person’s voice in a group in which s/he is the only member of his/her race. So can black, bet she cannot give an example otherwise, just assert that it is so.
  1. I can go into a music shop and count on finding the music of my race represented, into a supermarket and find the staple foods which fit with my cultural traditions, into a hairdresser’s shop and find someone who can cut my hair. What town does she live in to not see the same services provided for black folks? Supermarket will sale what they can make a profit on, and not bases upon what the race of the purchaser is.  If the neighborhood is 80-90 percent white they will pick products to sell to white purchasers.  If the neighborhood is 80-90 percent black they will pick products to serve that market.  The same thing goes for Mexican and Asians, etc.  No store is going to stock stuff for an occasional shopper as opposed to the regular shoppers.
  1. Whether I use checks, credit cards or cash, I can count on my skin color not to work against the appearance of financial reliability. I see black using both without incident, although I also see them using EBC along with white, no one in my present has anyone of them ever been questioned about their means of payment.  How many do you reckon that McIntosh has saw and how many has she just heard stories about?
  1. I can arrange to protect my children most of the time from people who might not like them. And how does she perceive that black cannot?  Can she protect them from the risk of people seriously hurt, and even killed by the unprovoked attacks by blacks on white playing the “Knock Out Game”?
  1. I do not have to educate my children to be aware of systemic racism for their own daily physical protection. I wonder if she makes them aware of racists like the likes of those in the Black Grievance Industrialists who milk $billions upon $billions from the taxpayers from scams like the Pigfordsettlements for an example  “TheNew York Times reported Friday that the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) has likely enabled massive fraud in the Pigford series of legal settlements, in which black, Hispanic, female and Native American farmers have claimed to be victims of past discrimination.” 
  1. I can be pretty sure that my children’s teachers and employers will tolerate them if they fit school and workplace norms; my chief worries about them do not concern others’ attitudes toward their race. ” if they fit school and workplace norm” therein lies the rub.  Blacks set in trouble in school mush more for their behavior than for their race.  And no the Federal Government is pushing schools not to dispalein black kids with “A routine school disciplinary infraction should land a student in the principal’s office, not in a police precinct,” Holder said upon the release of first-of-its-kind school discipline guidance in January.”  It is because of pressure like this on the school systems that Trayvon Martin’s possession of stolen property  was not reported to the police. See The Curious Case Of Trayvon Martin’s Backpack With Stolen Jewelry and Burglary Tool…
  1. I can talk with my mouth full and not have people put this down to my color.  I wonder when she saw thiis happen to a black person, I never have
  1. I can swear, or dress in second hand clothes, or not answer letters, without having people attribute these choices to the bad morals, the poverty or the illiteracy of my race.  In spite of her assertion, this does not happen to black people either.
  1. I can speak in public to a powerful male group without putting my race on trial.  So do the black people I knoe, the last two Commandants of my Marine Corps League Detachment have been black, and they have no problem speaking up.
  1. I can do well in a challenging situation without being called a credit to my race. That is another thing that is in out history, and not our present.  When is the last time you have heard it uttered?
  1. I am never asked to speak for all the people of my racial group.  Name me the names of blacks who have been asked to do that?
  1. I can remain oblivious of the language and customs of persons of color who constitute the world’s majority without feeling in my culture any penalty for such oblivion.  You live in this country, not there, and the most of us will never go there.  Our lives and concerms are here in America, not where this world’s majority live.
  1. I can criticize our government and talk about how much I fear its policies and behavior without being seen as a cultural outsider. Who in America are not free to do these things?  It is when you want to change our laws to suit your customs that you run into problems with the people hop like the Constitution.
  1. I can be pretty sure that if I ask to talk to the “person in charge”, I will be facing a person of my race. Would that be true if you lived in India, Pakistan, China, or Egypt? Why should it be different here?  
  1. If a traffic cop pulls me over or if the IRS audits my tax return, I can be sure I haven’t been singled out because of my race. How, the TEA Party were singled out for their political believe, that they were mostly white Christians.
  1. I can easily buy posters, post-cards, picture books, greeting cards, dolls, toys and children’s magazines featuring people of my race.  That again depends upon where are shopping, not because of racism or white privilege.
  1. I can go home from most meetings of organizations I belong to feeling somewhat tied in, rather than isolated, out-of-place, outnumbered, unheard, held at a distance or feared. If your are outnumbered your are outnumbered.  Could you say that is you live in India, Pakistan, China, or Egypt?

  1. I can be pretty sure that an argument with a colleague of another race is more likely to jeopardize her/his chances for advancement than to jeopardize mine.  That again an unproven assertion, that would depend upon many thing other that race, meritrocity also plays a role, as well as time on the job and personality.

  1. I can be pretty sure that if I argue for the promotion of a person of another race, or a program centering on race, this is not likely to cost me heavily within my present setting, even if my colleagues disagree with me.  Why should a program ever be centering on race?  And why ius she assuming that this would not be true if she was not white?

  1. If I declare there is a racial issue at hand, or there isn’t a racial issue at hand, my race will lend me more credibility for either position than a person of color will have.  The Supreme Court is all but one white.  She says, “…my race will lend me more credibility…”  This has not been the case in any organization I have ever worked for, nor in the Marine Corps.  Right and wrong have been/are judge right or wrong on the rightness or wrongness of the matter, not upon the race of the one in disagreement.  I do wonder who she has been hanging out with.

  1. I can choose to ignore developments in minority writing and minority activist programs, or disparage them, or learn from them, but in any case, I can find ways to be more or less protected from negative consequences of any of these choices. How?

  1. My culture gives me little fear about ignoring the perspectives and powers of people of other races.  Tell that to the black cop or Black Judge.

  1. I am not made acutely aware that my shape, bearing or body odor will be taken as a reflection on my race.  
    I have been asked to use underarm deodorant, was that a reflection upon my race?

  1. I can worry about racism without being seen as self-interested or self-seeking.  Only if it is white racism and not the racism of blacks.

  1. I can take a job with an affirmative action employer without having my co-workers on the job suspect that I got it because of my race. If you got it because they needed a woman to fill their diversity needs you may not be thought to have gotten it because of your race, but because of your sex.  Many black are put into schools they are not prepared for and failed in their effort because of their race.  Today we have this headline: Harvard And UNC Sued Over Race-Based Admission Policies

  1. If my day, week or year is going badly, I need not ask of each negative episode or situation whether it had racial overtones. Good for you, how many black do you know have to do this?  Would it not have to do with the type of work they were doing?  A carpenter would not have these concerns, nor a plumber or electrician (I know blacks who do all of these jobs) and do you reckon black doctors and lawyers  have these thoughts?

  1. I can be pretty sure of finding people who would be willing to talk with me and advise me about my next steps, professionally. And you know blacks canno,t how

  1. I can think over many options, social, political, imaginative or professional, without asking whether a person of my race would be accepted or allowed to do what I want to do. Name just one that blacks do not do?

  1. I can be late to a meeting without having the lateness reflect on my race. Now she is just getting ridicules.

  1. I can choose public accommodation without fearing that people of my race cannot get in or will be mistreated in the places I have chosen. Where in America is this not true?  Oh, I know, would she move here: Family Beaten For Being White In Black Neighborhood or  here: The woman who was murdered for being white while campaigning for Barack Obama in a black neighborhood.  Yes, I know that blacks get killed by whites too, but not near in the proportions that blacks kill whites.  I am just referring to her white pl9ivlage protecting her from this, which is bullshit, what protects her from it is her staying safely away from it.

  1. I can be sure that if I need legal or medical help, my race will not work against me.

  1. I can arrange my activities so that I will never have to experience feelings of rejection owing to my race.  gGive me an example of where a person race prevented them getting medical care, being poor is much more of a problem than being black.  Being poor cuts across all the races, and affect them equally.

  1. If I have low credibility as a leader I can be sure that my race is not the problem.  How? Would that not also be a function of the group you were in?  If it was a liberal, conservative, northern, southern, western, white or a black group would make no differance?

  1. I can easily find academic courses and institutions which give attention only to people of my race.  If you are black you can, black colleges are the only that have their race in their name, They are the only one with a college fund dedicated to their race.  Name me one white college where only white people go to.  This is another example of conflating the past with the present.

  1. I can expect figurative language and imagery in all of the arts to testify to experiences of my race. How does this help a white person in any manner?  How dies it hurt a black person?  And agin I ask the question, would it be true if you lived in India, Pakistan, China, or Egypt? If you lived there would the privilege belong to another race, what would it be, a brown privilege? 

  1. I can chose blemish cover or bandages in “flesh” color and have them more or less match my skin.  That is the power of the market, not any privilege and would not be true if you lived in India, Pakistan, China, or Egypt

  1. I can travel alone or with my spouse without expecting embarrassment or hostility in those who deal with us.  Most other races can do that in America unless you are white in a hostile black neighbourhood.

  1. I have no difficulty finding neighborhoods where people approve of our household.  I discussed that above with my own black neighbors.

  1. My children are given texts and classes which implicitly support our kind of family unit and do not turn them against my choice of domestic partnership. I guess that she is talking about queers here.

  1. I will feel welcomed and “normal” in the usual walks of public life, institutional and social.  Frome the holier than thou attitude she projects I do not think that she would feel normal in my social life.  She would take offense, I am sure, at how I phrase things, my comment to freedom, including freedom of association which implies a freedom to disassociate for whatever reason a person decides be they of any race.

Monday, November 17, 2014

Knowing And Understanding

I was having a discussion the other day about how you know when you know something? According to Webster’s New World Dictionary, the word “know” is a verb tense that means one of four things. The first is “to be well informed about.” The second is “to be aware of.” The third is “to be acquainted with.” And the final is “to recognize or distinguish.”  I have came to believe that our question should have been, “How do we know when we understand something.”

We cannot understand anything that we cannot explain in words, for understanding requires reasoning and reasoning requires words.  If you think that you know something try explaining it to someone who does not.  You may find that you cannot find the words to describe your understanding of what it is that you think you know, which is a sure sign that you do not know it, but just ‘think’ that you know it.  We all some assumptions about what words and ideas mean, and what it means to understand or “know about” something.  Now what would you have to do in order to make an inference that another person actually understands what they said they understood?

You would listen to or read their words, evaluate what they said and the authority with which they spoke.  Now a bum on the street is as capable of understanding and explaining that understand as well as any man, but if he was explaining how Nuclear Magnetic Resonance Imaging was able to draw a picture of the inside of your brain you would not give him the same credence as you would Radiologists who read the pictures.  As well, you would discount his explanation even without ever talking to a radiologist or a physicist just because he was a bum on the street.  In most cases, your dismissal would be justified, but what about the bum who had made his living for 20 years working on NMRIs?  His explanation would be as sound as any radiologists or physicist, but his status as a bum would close your ears to his understanding.
“The acid test for understanding is rather simple; if a person says he or she understands something, then the person should be able to explain to others what it is that is understood. It come down to the premise that if you can’t explain what you know, then chances are you don’t know it. But there are functions of knowledge that go beyond explanation. In addition, as has been stated many times on the ADPRIMA site, “anything not understood in more than one way is not understood at all.”  WHAT IT MEANS TO UNDERSTAND SOMETHING
There is a further complication, just because you, or another, knows a subject well enough to explain it well does not assure that which being explained is a true depiction of what is being explained.  How do you know how the universe was created?  There are numinous explanations, all explained well and well understood by those doing the explaining.  To touch on just two:

The  Materialist holds that matter is the fundamental substance in nature, and that all phenomena, including mental phenomena and consciousness, are the result of material interactions.  They believe in a cause and effect universe with each and every effect caused by a previous cause, with the first affect being the Big Bang which set everything into motion and is still setting down.  They believe that even the motion of the neurons and the firing of the synapses in our brains are just a continuation of the event set into being by the Big Bang, the Big Bang is their god creator.  However, what caused the Big Bang is not considered.  They deny  the present of a soul or any god other than the ones created by man.  This is indeed a religion! Its name is Scientism, which is the belief that only science can deliver the answers as to what the universe is, how it came about, and how it works.  They do not concern themselves with such question as to why there is anything instead of nothing.

On the other end of the spectrum are people like me who hold that God said, “Let there be light” and there was light.

Tuesday, November 11, 2014

Advent of Obamacare

December 24th, 2009 – The Government Took Over Our Healthcare.
Of the 60 Democrat Senators who voted for Obamacare, only 31 remain in office today as 28 Senators who voted for Obamacare either lost their re-election, retired or died.

To do this after passing a bill that originated in the House they took it into what is called reconciliation, where they stripped every word out of the original bill, and inserted Obamacare, which was so massive that Pelosi said that “we had to pass it so we could know what was in it”. The 60 Democratic Senators then pass the ACA without debate and without a single Republican vote.

Monday, November 10, 2014

Quotes about Marines

There are only two kinds of people that understand Marines: Marines and the enemy. Everyone else has a second-hand opinion.
Gen. William Thornson, U.S. Army

Freedom is not free, but the U.S. Marine Corps will pay most of your share.
Ned Dolan

A Marine is a Marine.  I set that policy two weeks ago – there’s no such thing as a former Marine.   You’re a Marine,  just in a different uniform and you’re in a different phase of your life.  But you’ll always be a Marine because you went to Parris Island, San Diego or the hills of Quantico.  There’s no such thing as a former Marine.
General James F. Amos, 35th Commandant of the Marine Corps

I come in peace, I didn’t bring artillery.  But I am pleading with you with tears in my eyes:  If you fuck with me, I’ll kill you all.
Marine General James Mattis, to Iraqi tribal leaders

Hell, these are Marines.  Men like them held Guadalcanal and took Iwo Jima.  Bagdad ain’t shit.
Marine Major General John F. Kelly

We signed up knowing the risk. Those innocent people in New York didn’t go to work thinking there was any kind of risk.
Pvt. Mike Armendariz-Clark, USMC; Afghanastan, 20 September 2001
As reported on page 1 of the New York Times

The safest place in Korea was right behind a platoon of Marines. Lord, how they could fight!
MGen. Frank E. Lowe, USA; Korea, 26 January 1952

Marines know how to use their bayonets. Army bayonets may as well be paper-weights. 
Navy Times; November 1994

Why in hell can’t the Army do it if the Marinescan. They are the same kind of men; why can’t they be like Marines. 
Gen. John J. “Black Jack” Pershing, USA; 12 February 1918

The United States Marine Corps, with its fiercely proud tradition of excellence in combat, its hallowed rituals, and its unbending code of honor, is part of the fabric of American myth. 
Thomas E. Ricks; Making the Corps, 1997

For all of those that have son’s or daughter’s atbootcamp let me pass on what I found. Let me give you a little back ground first. When my son left home he had no motivation, he was lazy,slobby, no pride, no self worth. This is the boy that got off the bus March 18th at Parris Island. The man that I met on Thursday for parents day is AWESOME. There is no way I can describe to you all the difference. He looks different, he walks different, he talks different, he has such a sense of bearing and pride all I could do was look at him in awe. Oh yes, the training is hard, what he went through is unimaginable to any one that has not been there. They are definitely taught to be Warriors. Let me tell you the surprise of what else they are taught. My Marine son has better values, better morals, bettermanners than any one I know. It is so much more than Yes Sir, Yes Mam…so much more. He cares about how he looks, he cares about what he does, and its not a boastful, bad ass thing. He is a true gentleman. I saw patience, and a calmness in him that I have never seen. I could never express my gratitude enough to the Marine Corps for what they have given my son. I knowthis, I have an 11 year old Devil pup still at home. When the time comes for his turn if I had to I would take him kicking and screaming all the way. Although I’m sure that will not happen. The hero worship I see in my younger sons eyes for his Marine brother tells me I will have two Marines in the family, and I will be one very proud mother. 
“Cybil”, Mother of a Marine writing to the myMarineGroup

The raising of that flag on Suribachi means a Marine Corps for the next five hundred years. 
James Forrestal, Secretary of the Navy; 23 February 1945
(the flag-raising on Iwo Jima had been immortalized in a photograph by Associated Press photographer Joe Rosenthal)

I have just returned from visiting the Marines at the front, and there is not a finer fighting organization in the world! 
General of the Armies Douglas MacArthur; Korea, 21 September 1950

We have two companies of Marines running rampant all over the northern half of this island, and three Army regiments pinned down in the southwestern corner, doing nothing. What the hell is going on? 
Gen. John W. Vessey Jr., USA, Chairman of the the Joint Chiefs of Staff
during the assault on Grenada, 1983

The Marines I have seen around the world have the cleanest bodies, the filthiest minds, the highest morale, and the lowest morals of any group of animals I have ever seen. Thank God for the United States Marine Corps! 
Eleanor Roosevelt, First Lady of the United States, 1945

Some people spend an entire lifetime wondering if they made a difference in the world. But, the Marines don’t have that problem. 
Ronald Reagan, President of the United States; 1985

Marines I see as two breeds, Rottweilers or Dobermans, because Marines come in two varieties, big and mean, or skinny and mean. They’re aggressive on the attack and tenacious on defense. They’ve got really short hair and they always go for the throat. 
RAdm. “Jay” R. Stark, USN; 10 November 1995

They told (us) to open up the Embassy, or “we’ll blow you away.” And then they looked up and saw the Marines on the roof with these really big guns, and they said in Somali, “Igaralli ahow,” which means “Excuse me, I didn’t mean it, my mistake”. 
Karen Aquilar, in the U.S. Embassy; Mogadishu, Somalia, 1991

For over 221 years our Corps has done two things for this great Nation. We make Marines, and we win battles. 
Gen. Charles C. Krulak, USMC (CMC); 5 May 1997

Come on, you sons of bitches! Do you want to live forever? 
GySgt. Daniel J. “Dan” Daly, USMC
near Lucy-`le-Bocage as he led the 5th Marines’ attack into Belleau Wood, 6 June 1918

Gone to Florida to fight the Indians. Will be back when the war is over. 
Colonel Commandant Archibald Henderson, USMC
in a note pinned to his office door, 1836

Don’t you forget that you’re First Marines! Not all the communists in Hell can overrun you! 
Col. Lewis B. “Chesty” Puller, USMC
rallying his First Marine Regiment near Chosin Reservoir, Korea, December 1950

Marines die, that’s what we’re here for. But the Marine Corps lives forever. And that means YOU live forever. 
the mythical GySgt. Hartman, USMC; portrayed by GySgt. R. Lee Ermey, a Marine Corps Drill Instructor using his own choice of words in Full Metal Jacket, 1987

You’ll never get a Purple Heart hiding in a foxhole! Follow me! 
Capt. Henry P. Crowe, USMC; Guadalcanal, 13 January 1943

We are United States Marines, and for two and a quarter centuries we have defined the standards of courage, esprit, and military prowess. 
Gen. James L. Jones, USMC (CMC); 10 November 2000

There are only two kinds of people that understand Marines: Marines and the enemy. Everyone else has a second-hand opinion.
Gen. William Thornson, U.S. Army

I love the Corps for those intangible possessions that cannot be issued: pride, honor, integrity, and being able to carry on the traditions for generations of warriors past. 
Cpl. Jeff Sornig, USMC; in Navy Times, November 1994

I have only two men out of my company and 20 out of some other company. We need support, but it is almost suicide to try to get it here as we are swept by machine gun fire and a constant barrage is on us. I have no one on my left and only a few on my right. I will hold. 
1stLt. Clifton B. Cates, USMC
in Belleau Wood, 19 July 1918

Courage is endurance for one moment more… 
Unknown Marine Second Lieutenant in Vietnam

My only answer as to why the Marines get the toughest jobs is because the average Leatherneck is a much better fighter. He has far more guts, courage, and better officers… These boys out here have a pride in the Marine Corps and will fight to the end no matter what the cost. 
2nd Lt. Richard C. Kennard, Peleliu, World War II

A Marine should be sworn to the patient endurance of hardships, like the ancient knights; and it is not the least of these necessary hardships to have to serve with sailors. 
Field Marshal Bernard Montgomery

Lying offshore, ready to act, the presence of ships and Marines sometimes means much more than just having air power or ship’s fire, when it comes to deterring a crisis. And the ships and Marines may not have to do anything but lie offshore. It is hard to lie offshore with a C-141 or C-130 full of airborne troops. 
Gen. Colin Powell, U. S. Army
Chairman Joint Chiefs of Staff
During Operation Desert Storm

This was the first time that the Marines of the two nations had fought side by side since thedefence of the Peking Legations in 1900. Let it be said that the admiration of all ranks of 41 Commando for their brothers in arms was and is unbounded. They fought like tigers and their morale and esprit de corps is second to none. 
Lt Col. D.B. Drysdale, Commanding
41 Commando, Chosen Reservoir, on the 1st Marine Division Division

The wonderful love of a beautiful maid,
The love of a staunch true man,
The love of a baby, unafraid,
Have existed since time began.
But the greatest of loves, The quintessence of loves.
even greater than that of a mother,
Is the tender, passionate, infinite love,
of one drunken Marine for another.
“Semper Fidelis”
General Louis H. Wilson
Commandant of the Marine Corps
Toast given at 203rd Marine Corps Birthday Ball
Camp Lejueune, N.C. 1978

You cannot exaggerate about the Marines. They are convinced to the point of arrogance, that they are the most ferocious fighters on earth- and the amusing thing about it is that they are. 
Father Kevin Keaney
1st Marine Division Chaplain
Korean War

There was always talk of espirit de corps, of being gung ho, and that must have been a part of it. Better, tougher training, more marksmanship on the firing range, the instant obedience to orders seared into men in boot camp. 
James Brady, columnist, novelist,
press secretary to President Reagan, television personality and

The bended knee is not a tradition of our Corps. 
General Alexander A. Vandergrift, USMC
to the Senate Naval Affairs Committee, 5 May 1946

By their victory, the 3rd, 4th and 5th Marine Divisions and other units of the Fifth Amphibious Corps have made an accounting to their country which only history will be able to value fully. Among the Americans who served on Iwo Island, uncommon valor was a common virtue. 
Admiral Chester W. Nimitz, U.S. Navy

Being ready is not what matters. What matters is winning after you get there. 
LtGen Victor H. Krulak, USMC
April 1965

The Marine Corps has just been called by the New York Times, ‘The elite of this country.’ I think it is the elite of the world. 
Admiral William Halsey, U.S. Navy

I still need Marines who can shoot and salute. But I need Marines who can fix jet engines and man sophisticated radar sets, as well. 
General Robert E. Cushman, Jr., USMC
Commandant of the Marine Corps, 17 May 1974

I can’t say enough about the two Marine divisions. If I use words like ‘brilliant,’ it would really be an under description of the absolutely superb job that they did in breaching the so-called ‘impenetrable barrier.’ It was a classic- absolutely classic- military breaching of a veryvery tough minefield, barbed wire, fire trenches-type barrier. 
Gen. Norman Schwarzkopf, U. S. Army
Commander, Operation Desert Storm, February 1991

I am convinced that there is no smarter, handier, or more adaptable body of troops in the world. 
Prime Minister of Britain, Sir Winston Churchhill

The deadliest weapon in the world is a Marine and his rifle. 
Gen. John “Black Jack” Pershing, U.S. Army
Commander of American Forces in World War I

Do not attack the First Marine Division. Leave the yellowlegs alone. Strike the American Army. 
Orders given to Communist troops in the Korean War;
shortly afterward, the Marines were ordered
to not wear their khaki leggings.

The American Marines have it [pride], and benefit from it. They are tough, cocky, sure of themselves and their buddies. They can fight and they know it. 
General Mark Clark, U.S. Army

They (Women Marines) don’t have a nickname, and they don’t need one. They get their basic training in a Marine atmosphere, at a Marine Post. They inherit the traditions of the Marines. They are Marines. 
LtGen Thomas Holcomb, USMC
Commandant of the Marine Corps, 1943

I’ve always been proud of being a Marine. I won’t hesitate to defend the Corps. 
Jonathan Winters, comic and Marine

Every Marine is, first and foremost, a rifleman. All other conditions are secondary. 
Gen. A. M. Gray, USMC
Commandant of the Marine Corps

A Ship without Marines is like a garment without buttons. 
Adm. David Dixon Porter, USN in a letter to
Colonel Commandant John Harris, USMC, 1863

The Marines have landed and the situation is well in hand. 
Attributed to Richard Harding Davis (1864-1916)

If I had one more division like this First Marine Division I could win this war. 
General of the Armies Douglas McArthur in Korea,
overheard and reported by Marine Staff Sergeant Bill Houghton, Weapons/2/5