Keys Posts 2012, Part 1

This entry is part 5 of 40 in the series 2012A

Jan 1, 2012

Gaps in Words

LWK Speaking from personal experience, the _only_ thing that will really convert the atheist mindset is pain; physical, emotional, and spiritual. They have to see for themselves that they need to somehow step outside the paradigms they have defined for themselves and take a leap of faith (“faith” as JJ defines it in The Gathering of Lights, Ch. 19 – Real Faith).

JJ You are right here Larry. In fact I have been arguing with atheists on another forum for the past couple days, kinda as a diversionary vacation, and I use their terminology and of course have changed no minds. I did find one guy who explained to me why he lost his faith who may have some hope.

Anyway, we are all like the alcoholic who has to hit rock bottom before we will make real change. I’m not clear what turned you around but I am sure it was something painful rather than a peaceful argument.

Jan 2, 2012

Re: Intelligent Aid

There are indeed two ways that we evolve. The first is through trial and error. Eventually the next learning point dawns on us as we stumble forward.

The second is with the assistance of a teacher or some type of guidance beyond the physical, perhaps from a higher life.

Now, even in the first category we are not alone for we slowly progress through interaction with other lives who are fellow travelers. These may not be able to explain to us the knowledge we need but they may stimulate or motivate us.

On this note DK gave an interesting thought. He said that higher lives looked upon primitive humans and their struggle to survive and basically felt sorry for them. They decided to help them and came to the earth and stimulated their minds greatly speeding up their evolution. He said that if they had not done this humanity would have still moved forward but much more slowly. The most advanced among us would be living like the Australian Bushmen in a primitive condition with little civilization. It would have been a long time in the future yet before we would have arrived where we are now.

As I’ve reflected on this it could give an explanation as to why we have not yet picked up an intelligent radio signal from another solar system. Perhaps we are one of the few planets that have received such stimulation and most of the life on other planets is still quite primitive. Maybe one of our purposes is to visit them in the future and stimulate them.

Jan 3, 2012

Odds on Candidates

Back in May I gave my odds on the various potential candidates getting the nomination. Since we are approaching the first primary in Iowa I thought I would revamp my odds.

At that time I gave Romney the highest odds for the nomination stating that he has karma on his side because of the way the press destroyed his Father when he ran for president in 1968.

I think he still has the best chance for the nomination, but it’s been a weird year. Every month or so a new favorite has arisen who has looked like he would eclipse Romney so far this hasn’t happened. Romney hasn’t seemed to move much up or down but of late he has been inching upward. In his favor is that he seems to be a known quantity with no hidden vices, actions or comments that can be exposed and he’s performed well at the debates without making a major error.

The greatest criticism at the debate came from him offering to bet Perry $10,000 that he was correct on a point. In my book I thought it was his finest moment but others were upset the average person could not bet $10,000.

My overall odds have changed as the landscape has changed. Here they are.

Romney: 60% chance for the nomination. Odds of beating Obama if nominated 70%

Ron Paul: 10% chance for the nomination. Odds of beating Obama if nominated 30%. It looks like he will do reasonably well in Iowa but his past newsletters is starting to hurt him with new converts as I earlier predicted. If Romney views him as a threat he will do to him what he did to Gingrich with an attack ad blitz

Rick Santorum: 10% chance for the nomination. Odds of beating Obama if nominated 45%

Gingrich: 10% chance for the nomination. Odds of beating Obama if nominated 60%

This leaves a 10% chance anyone else will get the nomination

There’s a 30% chance Donald Trump will run as a third party candidate. If he does all bets are off and a reevaluation will be made at that time. A third party run by Trump would definitely increase the odds of an Obama win. A third party in development called Americans Elect started by Obama supporter Peter Ackerman has about $22 million to advance its cause and could wind up with someone like Trump or Huntsman for its candidate and could help Obama get reelected. This may be its purpose. In my view this has a 20% chance of having a significant influence on the election. We’ll hear more about this group as we approach the election.

Another thing that could change the election equation is if Hillary is selected for vice president. Most Democrats want this to happen, but the two people most opposed to it are Obama and Clinton.

I think Obama doesn’t want her because she may overshadow him and he doesn’t trust her in that position. Clinton is reluctant to seek the vice presidency because she wouldn’t have much power there. If she were nominated for this position it would increase Obama’s election chances by about 10%.

Only time will reveal the truth for sure. It will be a interesting political year.

Jan 6, 2012

Re: JJ Quote from the Archives for Today

JJ Quote: “Each odd number representing a ray or plane (and even years) is polarized in the positive energy and the even numbers are polarized in the negative energy. Notice that concerning this great number of seven that we have four positive numbers and three negative which gives all creation a domination toward the positive, or the dominating good.”

Ruth: I am wondering that now we are entering an even number year which means the polarization more towards the negative energy, or rather female/intuitional/receiving/magnetic energy may come into play more in all aspects of living etc.?

JJ When we speak of the energies being positive and negative the meaning is not to be taken in black and white as good and evil. Both polarities are necessary for creation. Nothing would exist without the both of them. Both male and female aspects have their positive points and there would be no dominating good without them both working together.

The odd years will reveal more male energy and the even numbered years the female or emotional side will be stronger. It is no accident that U.S. elections are on even numbered years where emotion reaches a high point.

Jan 7, 2012

Re: Big Bang Theory

It’s one of my favorite shows.

I also like Revenge, Chuck, The Mentalist ,Hell on Wheels, Castle, The Middle, Two and a Half Men, and Fringe.

Jan 9, 2012

Re: A question for JJ on the Face of Jesus.

This gives me an idea for a group assignment. There are two portraits online where the artists claimed to paint Jesus from actually seeing him. The first is the one you mentioned by Akaine at:

The second is by Glenda Green at:

Take a look and these two and see if either registers as a true image.

Next go to Google image search at:

Type in “Jesus portrait” and scroll through the images. If you see any that strike a chord give us a link with your impressions.

Jan 10, 2012

Re: A question for JJ on Jesus.

Thanks for your comments and participation on the face of Jesus. There is something one can say for sure about him if he were to come across a true picture which is this. The eyes would be interesting and exude intelligence and a strong life force. Take this picture for instance:

It is a composite put together using research and guesswork and though some ingredients may be more accurate than the traditional pictures the eyes are surely way off. The guy just doesn’t look very bright and if a person is truly intelligent it is revealed through the eyes as well as the whole look of the individual.

Other pictures make Jesus look weak, wimpy, and effeminate in a syrupy way. These type of pictures can be ruled out as being good representations

I do not see any pictures on the internet that strike me as being 100% accurate but some capture part of his essence. I would have to say that I like Akaine’s picture best at:

I did see one many years ago in a tabloid that impressed me as accurate. I cut it out and saved it for a long time and was finally lost in one of my moves. It hasn’t surfaced anywhere on the internet. I wish I had it to show it to you. I’m sure the group would be impressed.

It was painted by a lady who claimed to have had a vision of Christ when he was in his twenties. His hair wasn’t that long and he didn’t have a beard at the time, but it was the most interesting looking human being I had ever seen.

Ruth brings up an interesting item of discussion. If one has soul contact does this mean he would recognize a true picture of Jesus?

Not necessarily. If one had known Jesus in a past life this would be possible but if he had not then it would require true psychic powers rather than soul contact to bring forth the right image.

Remember soul contact deals with principles more than data. Sometimes when it is important the soul will send an impression on a piece of data but more often than not we are on our own to reason it out. On the other hand, the person with reliable soul contact is very capable in seeing true principles and how they play out in this reality.

Jan 10, 2012

Re: recognizing Jesus.

Dan: How about if the overshadowed Jesus were actually standing before us? It seems almost incomprehensible that MOST folks wouldn’t feel the impact – I suppose to some it would just evoke irritation rather than peace but SOMETHING would register in almost everyone wouldn’t it?

JJ The actual presence of a person is much different than a photo or painting. In this case soul contact is a great help for you can sense the aura of the person as well as his inner being. As I said before one with soul contact can recognize another with it in their physical presence and often in communication away from their presence.

Jan 12, 2012

Ron Paul & World War II

Ron Paul was drafted for service He had to go. FDR did not get the approval of Congress to help Churchill during the war before 1941 but had to bend the rules. His good judgment made a world of difference – something Ron Paul would have never done. I doubt if Paul would have declared war on Germany until they were at our shores.

Keith: Ron Paul may or may not have gone to to war in 1941 if he was President. There is no way for anybody to know for sure. I honestly do not know. My gut instinct tells me Ron Paul is being unfairly painted as an isolationist who would never go to war. I do not believe this is true.

JJ No one is saying he would never go to war. He has made it clear the conditions in which he would go to war though.

(1) The United States must be attacked by the enemy. (2) Congress must first officially declare war.

His statements indicate that he would have not responded to Hitler until he had attempted to invade our shores and that wouldn’t have happened until he had first conquered all of Europe and Russia. At the end of the war he was close to developing nuclear weapons and if he had some more time he would have had them available when the time came to attack us. Even so, with Iran Paul wants to do nothing to make them mad but will wait until they send a nuclear bomb somewhere.

As far as controlling spending and reducing the size of government I am with him 100%.

I would guess that Paul would have declared war on Japan but waited on Germany even though they were allies. Their alliance was not that tight before the U.S. got into the war. I’m not even sure he would have declared war on Japan since Hawaii was not yet a state. After all he was opposed to even going after the terrorists in Afghanistan (after 911) until a revolt by his staff changed his vote at the last minute:\ nistan-invasion-staff-threatened-mutiny/

I’m not saying he wouldn’t have done anything after Pear Harbor, but not sure he would have retaliated with an all out war. If he was set on not retaliating for 9/11 then it is probable he would have been reluctant to do much because of Pearl Harbor, specially since Hawaii was not a state.

Here is additional powerful evidence I am correct with his own words:

Journalist Jeffrey Shapiro posted a 2009 interview he held with the GOP’s leading candidate, in which Paul clearly states that if it were up to him at the time, saving the Jews from annihilation in Europe would not have been a moral imperative.

“I asked Congressman Paul: If he were president of the United States during World War II would he have sent American troops to Nazi Germany to save the Jews? And the Congressman answered: No, I wouldn’t”

“I wouldn’t risk American lives to do that. If someone wants to do that on their own because they want to do that, well, that’s fine, but I wouldn’t do that,” Shapiro wrote.

(Like someone on their own was going to make war with Hitler),7340,L-4167841,00.html


Jan 12, 2012

Inside Ron Paul’s Mind

Here’s another quote, this time from a former member of Ron Paul’s staff, Eric Dondero: Ron Paul is most assuredly an isolationist. He denies this charge vociferously. But I can tell you straight out, I had countless arguments/discussions with him over his personal views. For example, he strenuously does not believe the United States had any business getting involved in fighting Hitler in WWII. He expressed to me countless times, that saving the Jews, was absolutely none of our business. When pressed, he often times brings up conspiracy theories like FDR knew about the attacks of Pearl Harbor weeks before hand, or that WWII was just blowback, for Woodrow Wilson’s foreign policy errors, and such.

I would challenge him, like for example, what about the instances of German U-boats attacking U.S. ships, or even landing on the coast of North Carolina or Long Island, NY. He’d finally concede that that and only that was reason enough to counter-attack against the Nazis, not any humanitarian causes like preventing the Holocaust.

There is much more information I could give you on the sheer lunacy of his foreign policy views.

Jan 13, 2012

Re: Ron Paul Predictions

Keith: The only part I slightly disagree with is your assessment that we are not in a dollar crisis. I think we have been in a dollar crisis for a few years now.

JJ I think you misread me there. Here was the dialog.

Ron Paul: An international dollar crisis will dramatically boost interest rates in the United States.

My response: Didn’t happen. Interest rates have been very low over the past 10 years.

What didn’t happen was a dramatic rise in the interest rates due to any dollar crisis. I made no statement saying there was or was not a dollar crisis. It’s up to interpretation whether one would call the current instability of the dollar a crisis, but there is certainly a danger with it considering the world situation. The danger from the European situation is much greater right now than the fact that we have printed so much money.

Copyright 2012 by J J Dewey

Easy Access to all the Writings

Register at Freeread Here

(You do not have to log in to add comments)

Log on to Freeread Here

For Free Book go Here


After New Hampshire

This entry is part 2 of 40 in the series 2012A

Now that the New Hampshire voting is over I thought I would give a rundown on my views of the presidential contenders for the Republican party.

(1) Romney. With two wins it looks like his chances are improving to get the nomination. All may not be smooth sailing however because the other candidates are ganging up on him. Gingrich and Santorum have received substantial contributions lately, Rick Perry still has cash and if Jon Huntsman gets some help from his rich father he could wind up doing some damage. The there’s Ron Paul with lots of cash who goes after anyone he doesn’t like or agree with.

I’ll cover the rest of the candidates and then go back to Romney.

(2) Ron Paul. I agree with many of his libertarian stands as far as they support liberty and financial common sense but many of his views I consider to be anti libertarian, especially his isolationism. I think that if he were president instead of FDR that he wouldn’t have assisted Churchill and Hitler would have conquered England and all Europe. It is doubtful he would have developed the atomic bomb whereas Hitler would have and would have eventually invaded us with him having atomic weapons and us being ill prepared, but standing on some obscure principles of supposed non interference and supposed freedom.

Today we face new Hitlers and Ron Paul wants to just leave them be to establish a new incarnation of Nazism that we fought so hard to defeat in the last century.

Whoever is president should demonstrate the power to use good judgment but the trouble with Paul is he has everything formulated in black and white and doesn’t seem to leave any wiggle room for making judgments out of the box when necessary.

I see his core group of supporters remaining strong and enthused but the 23% in New Hampshire will most likely be near his high point in votes.

(3) Huntsman came in third in New Hampshire. Earlier he said that if he didn’t win in this state that he would drop out of the race. Well, he came in third and he’s more determined than ever to stay in and bring Romney down. Even though Ron Paul beat him for second place by five points Huntsman has the gall to proclaim that he really came in second. Why? Because Ron Paul doesn’t count.

This idiotic statement by itself is enough to turn me off of Huntsman. I’m no fan of Ron Paul but he does indeed count and most take him much more seriously than Huntsman.

I’d vote for Huntsman over Obama but there is something about his demeanor that rubs me the wrong way. He exudes an atmosphere of superiority that I think a lot of people sense and are turned off by. For instance, he seems smug about the fact that he accepts the orthodox view of global warming and sees skeptics as “anti-science.” This is not true at all for the true scientific method has to include a hearty dose of skepticism.

(4) New Gingrich. When I learned he was entering the race I told myself that if he wanted my support he had to do something to redeem himself for appearing with Nancy Pelosi in support of orthodox global warming propaganda.

Instead of changing my mind he has only reinforced the idea that he is capable of making big mistakes that is unbecoming a president.

He started out with an air of superiority himself by claiming to be the only candidate who was going to remain positive to the end. Well, he took an about face on that idea after Romney ads took him out of the picture in Iowa. He has now turned into the most negative candidate I have seen in my life. He seems more determined to destroy Romney than he is to become president. He’s like the general who turns on his own troops in anger while forgetting that he has a real enemy to fight.

On top of this Newt has attacked Romney as a supporter of “predatory capitalism.” Obama and the Wall Street protesters couldn’t have come up with a better attack phrase. When I have heard him attack Romney’s efforts in capitalism the past few days I hear words that could have come from socialist Bernie Sanders.

(5) Santorum. As expected Santorum took a hit in New Hampshire and is unlikely to win much in the future. To his credit he hasn’t joined the chorus in attacking free enterprise. His big drawback is he comes across as too religious and places lopsided attention on social issues. Reagan was a conservative, but he placed over 80% of his attention on the economy and national security. I believe that this is where the majority of Americans want the president to put his attention.

The biggest problem I have with Santorum is his bad judgment and lack of self control. When he was running again Hillary and debating her he left his podium, walked over to hers and challenged her. That really seemed to infringe on her space and was a big item in his defeat.

Several times in the current debates he ran into overtime and then interrupted other candidates, stealing their time talking over them. That really rubbed me the wrong way.

Our president must be more than a pure ideologist but must be composed and have to self-control to use correct speech and timing in dealing with world leaders.

(6) Perry He seems to be a lightweight lacking gravitas similar to Santorum and also spoke out of order during the debates. He clinched my rejection of him when he called Romney’s legitimate business ventures “vulture capitalism.” He appeared to be attempting to out due Newt in the attack capitalism department.

This brings me back to Romney. He may not be the perfect candidate but he is head and shoulders above the rest of the bunch. I think a lot of the criticism of him is misplaced and he seems to have good self control and presence that will be needed in dealing with world leaders.

Agreeing with me is only part of what I look for in a president. If he agrees with me but doesn’t have presence of mind to avoid insulting world leaders and possibly leading to an unnecessary conflict then he is not for me.

Overall I think Romney has the best judgment of the bunch and if elected president I believe he will eventually be compared to Reagan.

Copyright 2012 by J J Dewey

Easy Access to all the Writings

Register at Freeread Here

(You do not have to log in to add comments)

Log on to Freeread Here

For Free Book go Here

Prediction Results 2011

This entry is part 1 of 40 in the series 2012A

Ruth asked me about predictions. A lot of people are making them so we might as well join in. Anyone willing to embarrass themselves is welcome to join in and make a few. If you made some last year that were accurate – tell us about them.

I’ll review predictions I made the first of last year.

First, let us take a look at President Obama.
The big democratic defeat has done nothing to change his mind on his basic goals. He wants a single payer, government controlled health care system and as much redistribution of the wealth as possible by 2012.
However, the Republican victory has for the first time caused him to modify his approach. He realizes he must now make some adjustments if he and his party are going to have any power over the next few years.
Here is his strategy.
He plunged ahead with his leftist agenda unapologetically for the first two years thinking this was the time of opportunity which may not come again. Now the backlash has come he will attempt to create the illusion that he is listening to the people and moderating his position. He will present himself as the common sense guy in the middle whereas the Republicans, especially the newly elected tea party supporters, are right wing extremists unwilling to cooperate.
The term “reaching across the aisle” will be stressed many times while doing very little reaching but lots of condemning the other side as being inflexible.

JJ Comment:
This seems to have been very accurate. One good example is Obama presenting himself as the champion of tax cutting by cutting he payroll tax and making the Republicans look like they are against tax cuts. Instead of presenting big socialist programs this last year he is attempting to appear more like Reagan than the Republicans. Of course, not everyone is buying this.

Obama thought that his big spending practices would make him beloved of the many and he would be hailed as greater than FDR. This has backfired on him, but not changed his mind. Some economic advisers are still telling him that the problem is that he has not spent enough. Now he is not personally sure what to do, but is addicted to spending and will continue to spend all that is possible to further his goals and win the next election.

JJ Response:
This has certainly come true. Obama has not backed down on the spending and even now wants to borrow another trillion. He is determined to spend himself to victory by throwing the money at the voters.

Also he recently compared himself to FDR.

The whole country is shifting toward the conservative view of financial responsibility and even some of the liberal mainstream media will shift and be more supportive in the direction of economic common sense. This will put pressure on Obama to follow and by the end of the year some will think he has gown while in office and is now able to govern more from the center than before.

JJ Response:
Many in the media are showing concern for the high spending, but many also think Obama is becoming more sensible.

This shift of perception will make Obama harder to beat even if the economy declines. Mitt Romney and Chris Christie are the only Republicans that are a sure bet to beat him. But Christie will not run and Mitt may or may not get the nomination. Sarah Palin, and Mike Huckabee have a 50/50 chance of beating him and Ron Paul has a slimmer chance because of the attacks that would come from the media if he gets the nomination.

JJ Response:
Christie didn’t run as predicted and Huckabee and Palin did not enter. For the rest we’ll have to wait and see.

One of Obama’s advisors has, or shortly will, place an ingenious idea into his head in hope of turning public support in his direction again. The idea is to get Michelle pregnant again and have a new baby in the White House just before the election of 2012 takes place.
Since most view Obama as a great Dad a new cute cuddly baby will be just the ticket to draw attention to Obama in a positive way and take the public’s mind off his shortcomings. The only problem is that Michelle isn’t excited about having another kid right now and may not cooperate, but could give in if the right incentives are given her.

JJ Comment:
I’m sure this idea has been discussed. Since the prediction a number of rumors have been circulating about her being pregnant. Time will tell. Here are a couple of the latest:


Obama’s health care plan will face serious challenges. It will not be repealed by 2012 but there will be a growing dissatisfaction and the Republicans will slow its implementation through defunding and other means.
The requirement that everyone has to purchase health insurance will continue to be challenged by the courts and go all the way to the Supreme Court where it will be declared unconstitutional. This will not discourage liberal Democrats though who will still attempt to give us universal health care through every back door possible. They correctly believe that once a give-away program is implemented that it will be almost impossible to eliminate.

JJ Comment;
This was right on and the health care mandate is on its way to the Supreme Court.

Rumors of Obama having an affair will circulate and some type of another scandal will surface that he will be linked to but not destroyed by it.

JJ Comment
Obama has been linked several times this year to a past affair in 2004 to a lady named Vera Baker but the friendly media hasn’t been investigating it.

The Solinda scandal surfaced but the media has been going soft on Obama over it so it has not done him a lot of damage.

Wiki and other leakers will embarrass the administration and world leaders and give them an excuse to push for internet regulation. Most of the media will work to smooth over the damage to Obama that could have destroyed a conservative president.

JJ Comment:
Wikileaks did embarrass Obama several times the last year. It revealed that Obama gave Russia Britain’s nuclear secrets and exposed the lies about the gun sales to Mexican Drug dealers.

Now let’s look at the new Republican Congress.
Overall the results of this will be predictable. The Democrats will find them very frustrating as well as many on the Right who do not see as much reform as they desire.
Obama will try the divide and conquer approach by befriending some who he sees as cooperative to entice them to opposing those who he will label as far right.
On the other hand, there will be Democrats who will side with the Tea Party views in the hope this will secure re-election. Then there are a handful who see that overspending must be curtailed.
The Left and the mainstream media will attempt to blame all that goes wrong on the new Congress but, even though this will have some effect, it will not take hold as it did in the days of Newt Gingrich.

JJ Comment:
This seems to have been quite accurate.

The greatest short term threats to the economy for this year will be from outside influences such as natural or manmade disaster and the threat of new conflict.
JJ Comment;
2011 was reported as the costliest year in history from natural disasters.

Outside of this the economy will actually show some improvement due to business optimism because of the new Republican Congress. This will not produce a miracle but it will hold a shaky economy together for one more year.

JJ Comment:
Again, this seems to be accurate.

Possible Conflicts
North Korea and Iran will both rattle their sabers but we will not go to war this year. One of the reasons is that China warns us against it and they are becoming so powerful that we are afraid to stir up a possible conflict with them. There will be growing concern that they could turn aggressive, but on the positive side there is a growing number of Chinese who desire a peaceful Democracy. We can only hope that this aspect of the people will prevail.

JJ Comment:
This appears again to be accurate and there are growing movements in China in support of democracy. Too bad I didn’t predict the death of Kim Jong il. That would have been impressive.

There will be a number of medical advances related to technology such as artificial eyesight, artificial limbs and nano technology.

JJ Comment:
I’m sure advancements have been made but haven’t taken the time to investigate.

UFO sightings will be up and one in particular will be difficult to explain away.

JJ Comment:
2011 is said to have more UFO sightings than any other year in history. One in Jerusalem is particularly interesting.
UFO Link

New particle discoveries will be made at the Large Hadron Collider at Cern but they will not find the Higgs particle this year.

JJ Comment:
They have been searching like crazy for the Higgs particle and think they have found some evidence but haven’t found it yet. They hope to prove its existence this year sometime.

Lady Gaga will make even stranger attempts to get attention causing some to think she is not stable.

JJ Comment;So true but this was a no brainer prediction. If you thought she was weird before take a look at this:
Lady Gaga Link

Reality TV will finally begin to lose some of its popularity, thank God.

JJ Comment:
This seems to be the first prediction so far that didn’t come true. I think I was having wishful thinking as I do not like the reality shows.

Apple will continue to put out innovative products that will keep it on the cutting edge and its popularity will increase when it markets a 3-D monitor.

JJ Comment:
Apple is still doing great. Apple’s working on a 3D monitor but hasn’t released it yet:
3D Link
It is also working on reinventing the television:
Apple Television link

Obama will work toward normalizing relations with Cuba whether Congress cooperates or not.

JJ Comment:
This started to come true a couple weeks after the prediction:
Cuba Link

Also see:
Cuba Link#2

There will be several weather related disasters and flooding will be a problem. Problems will be worse than usual but not cataclysmic.

JJ Comment:
The Japan Tsunami was pretty bad but not cataclysmic. There were much more than average weather related disasters and lots of flooding throughout the world.

With the high price of gold staying up there and unemployment high more people will prospect and mine for gold. There will be a gold rush in several parts of the world and gold production will go up.

JJ Comment:
The price of Gold has stayed up there. When the prediction was made it was around $1400 an ounce and it is now $1610. There are lots of stories from the past year about the modern gold rush. Here is one:
Gold Rush Link

The danger of China having a monopoly on rare earth elements will finally dawn on the public consciousness and there will develop a push to mine theses elements in the United States, Canada, Australia and other countries.

JJ Comment:
This was right on. Check this out:
Rare Earth Link

Prices of essentials such as food, fuel and power will go up and many non essentials will go down. This will create the illusion that there is not as much inflation as there really is affecting he average household.

JJ Comment:
This seems to be true as far as I can tell.

Talk of global warming will become a joke except during the summer when it does truly get warm.

JJ Comment:
Seems that way. Jay Leno and others joke about it increasingly.

The Patriots will win the Superbowl.

JJ Comment:
Ooops… Wishful thinking on that one.

Academy Awards
: The King’s Speech will win best Picture and Colin Firth who stars in it will receive Best Actor
Natalie Portman will receive best actress for Black Swan.

JJ Comment:
This makes up for my Superbowl miss. I was 100% correct on the Academy Awards.

On July 26 I made this prediction in response to all the alarm over Comet Elenin:
“By January of next year the memory of disaster warnings over Elenin will fade into the background as has the alarm over Y2K and Past Nibiru warnings. We will have other things to worry about.”

JJ Comment;
After the sun destroyed Eleinin it is now out of mind and out of sight.

Overall my accuracy was much better than the psychics I know of out there and I do not claim to be psychic.


Copyright 2012 by J J Dewey

Easy Access to all the Writings

Register at Freeread Here

(You do not have to log in to add comments)

Log on to Freeread Here

For Free Book go Here

Romney & Hot Air

This entry is part 23 of 31 in the series 2011B

LWK links to this Romney quote asking if he is full of hot air.

“I don’t speak for the scientific community, of course,’’ Romney said. “But I believe the world’s getting warmer. I can’t prove that, but I believe based on what I read that the world is getting warmer. And number two, I believe that humans contribute to that . . . so I think it’s important for us to reduce our emissions of pollutants and greenhouse gases that may well be significant contributors to the climate change and the global warming that you’re seeing.’’ Boston Globe, Jun 4, 2011

Before I comment let me remind readers that I have attacked the greens, the U.N. IPCC and numerous politicians for their distortion of facts and their desire to tax global warming out of existence as well as using it as a device to destroy capitalism.

I do not see any of that coming from Romney. Let’s take a look at what he actually said.
“I believe the world’s getting warmer.”

So do I if you look at the overall picture of the past 100 years. It has leveled off since 1998 so we cannot say where it will go next for sure.

How I differ from the global warming alarmists is that I do not see enough evidence that we have any major problem coming that we can do anything about. We may get hit by a comet in five years but should we throw all of our resources into preventing this?

No. Because the risk is not high enough to warrant this. Neither is the proven risk of global warming.

Romney continues: “I believe that humans contribute to that (global warming).”

Again I agree with him. CO2, methane and other gasses released by humans do have some warming effect. Some scientists believe half of the warming comes from human produced greenhouse gasses and others think it to be less but all acknowledge that greenhouse gasses do have some warming effect. We just cannot prove how much that is.

Romney: “I think it’s important for us to reduce our emissions of pollutants and greenhouse gases that may well be significant contributors to the climate change.”

Again I agree with him. In addition to some warming effect the addition of excessive CO2 could have other unforeseen negative effects. For instance, studies show that the amount of oxygen in the atmosphere is decreasing and in some large population areas have gone down an alarming rate. Oxygen levels in the seas are also decreasing. When CO2 is formed oxygen is taken from the air. Some say that this and other human effects are producing oxygen sinks that take this vital element from the atmosphere. This should be of more concern than global warming.

I agree with Romney that we just can’t sit around and do nothing. My main point of disagreement with the environmentalists is their economy destroying approach that would do much more harm than good.

If we read on in this same Boston Globe article we see that Romney qualifies his approach with some common sense. It says:
“Romney has made clear that he opposes cap-and-trade, a system that would combat climate change by limiting total emissions and forcing polluters to pay for the greenhouse gases they produce.”

This is a huge item for me and is my main reason to take alarm at the standard environmentalist approach. Some say that the core of the environmental movement is not about the environment but about destroying capitalism and nothing gives evidence to this more than the insane cap and trade movement.

The fact that Romney is not deceived by this, as was candidates John McCain, Jon Huntsman,  Pawlenty, Gingrich and Gary Johnson, score points in my book.

Someone can read about global warming and absorb some wrong information and this does me no harm. But if he wants to destroy our way of life (and eventually the environment) by destroying our economy then I am ready for battle.

Again Romney is quoted:
“Americans should do more to conserve.”

When Obama says something like this I get nervous but when someone with business sense says it I can be supportive for I also support common sense conservation. I am a big believer in the Law of Economy.

The article continues:
Instead, he said yesterday, he wants to wean the country from its dependence on foreign oil by seeking alternative sources of energy… If elected, he said he would pursue more oil drilling, as well as natural gas and nuclear energy.

Well, this is a man with some sense. I would do the same if I were president.

He wants to:
(1) Wean the country from its dependence on foreign oil

I am all for that. It is crazy to depend on those who hate us for oil.

(2) Seek alternative sources of energy.

Again to do this with a common sense approach may yield high results.

(3) “He would pursue more oil drilling, as well as natural gas and nuclear energy.”

My type of guy. That is 180 degrees the opposite of the Obama approach.

Romney adds a final caveat:
“We can’t just say it’s going to be all solar and wind,’’ he said. “I love solar and wind, but they don’t drive cars. And we’re not going to all drive Chevy Volts.’’



Copyright 2011 by J J Dewey

Easy Access to all the Writings

Log on to Freeread Here