Eisenhower Warned Of Government Science Corruption in 1960

In 1960, Eisenhower saw the roots of corruption in science, which has led to the farce which climate science has become under Barack Obama.

In this revolution, research has become central; it also becomes more formalized, complex, and costly. A steadily increasing share is conducted for, by, or at the direction of, the Federal government.

Today, the solitary inventor, tinkering in his shop, has been overshadowed by task forces of scientists in laboratories and testing fields. In the same fashion, the free university, historically the fountainhead of free ideas and scientific discovery, has experienced a revolution in the conduct of research. Partly because of the huge costs involved, a government contract becomes virtually a substitute for intellectual curiosity. For every old blackboard there are now hundreds of new electronic computers.

The prospect of domination of the nation’s scholars by Federal employment, project allocations, and the power of money is ever present and is gravely to be regarded.

Yet, in holding scientific research and discovery in respect, as we should, we must also be alert to the equal and opposite danger that public policy could itself become the captive of a scientific technological elite.

Military-Industrial Complex Speech, Dwight D. Eisenhower, 1961

About Tony Heller

Just having fun
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

86 Responses to Eisenhower Warned Of Government Science Corruption in 1960

  1. Martin Smith says:

    Steven, Eisenhower’s warning isn’t evidence of corruption. If you have evidence of corruption by Gavin Schmidt, post it. We know there have been scientists who have filed false expense reports, but that’s not what Eisenhower was talking about. If you have any evidence that any adjustment to any dataset is even incorrect, let alone fraudulent, post your evidence. You have never ever posted any such evidence here.

    • It was a warning of future corruption. Like that which currently infects your mind.

      • Martin Smith says:

        I know what Eisenhower meant. Are you saying that Roy Spencer is guilty of fraud and corruption? Bob Tisdale? Do you have any evidence that Roy Spencer has committed fraud?

        • If you persist in your intellectual dishonesty and spam, I will ban you.

        • Martin Smith says:

          Steven, deleting comments critical of you is the essence of “intellectual dishonesty.”

        • You endless attempts to change the subject will be deleted, and eventually your presence here will be terminated.

        • David A says:

          Martin, if you know that Eisenhower’s speech was not just a warning about the military, but a very general warning about how money (Read power) reveals corruption in human nature, and government money backed by Goverment power is particularly dangerous in its ability to corrupt, then why are you denying that said power and funding has the potential to corrupt CAGW science?

        • Latitude says:

          martin is a victim of selective climate scientist syndrome…result of scientific corruption

          Don’t believe the climate scientists that published excuses for the “pause”…
          …only believe the ones that published saying there’s no pause

          Don’t believe the climate scientists that published accurate temperature records 2 years ago…
          …only believe the ones they “corrected” and say are accurate now

          Don’t believe the theory climate scientists put out last week…
          …only believe the new one they tell you today

          and on and on…………

        • DD More says:

          Marty – “I know what Eisenhower meant.”

          No you don’t because 14 minutes ago you said –
          Martin Smith says: January 14, 2016 at 1:08 pm
          He was talking about the military industrial complex, Doug. Climate science wasn’t even a gleam in Al Gore’s eye. But, you are making a serious accusation, again without including a shred of evidence.

          Here is a true Climate Scientist accused of fraud or ‘obtaining a financial advantage by deception’.
          A TOWNSVILLE climate scientist accused of ripping off his Federal Government employer for more than seven years will face court next month.

          The Townsville Bulletin can reveal that Dr Daniel Michael Alongi, 59, was arrested by the Australian Federal Police on September 6 after search warrants were executed at his home in Annandale and at his office at the Australian Institute of Marine Sciences (AIMS).
          He was charged with obtaining a financial advantage from a Commonwealth entity, namely AIMS, by deception.

          Sending in false invoices for data analysis and no one seemed to be smart enough to notice his data fit the models everytime?

    • bleakhouses says:

      Eisenhower was saying follow the money because govt money creates easy corruption and lacks accountability. Private money, where Spencer and Tisdale reside, demands accountability and oversight and while it can cause corruption the market makes the stakes so much higher that such corruption is the exception. With govt money corruption is the rule; from $400 toilet seats to the sale of automatic weapons to Mexican drug cartels.

      Martin, you know this and yet you post your drivel anyway, this makes you a tool in several senses of the word.

      • Martin Smith says:

        Yes, bleak, I know that. Who are you accusing of corruption? Name them, and show your evidence.

        • bleakhouses says:

          The issue is not of accusation; the issue is of perspective and rationality.

          You share Steve’s perspective but your targets are different. You think big Petro collude to hide certain evidence.

          Rationality dictates that corruption occurs everywhere, however, accountability where there is at best a two party sharing scheme is something else. If a political contractor is asked to fall on his sword due to corruption he is paid off, falls in his sword and the party moves on with at best a blemish they know will be forgotten soon. If a private entity is found to be corrupt there is a real price to be paid; many people are impacted.

          Thus the rational mind must conclude that corruption is rampant in politics and rare in the free market; this is what Eisenhower said.

        • sam says:

          The entire advent of the IPCC was corruption.. Margaret Thatcher wanted to promote nuclear power, she was having problem with the Coal Miners Union who brought down her government. At the time they were saying nuclear power was too dangerous, so she latched onto this garbage greenhouse gas theory- which was no where in 1988, as a way to say “yeah but coal is even more dangerous” She put government money on the table and told scientists to go after this theory. and there went the scientific method-the IPCC reached a conclusion FIRST and then did weak studies to promote the baseless theory.
          Eisenhower also warned about the military-industrial complex. Prior to wwii the US military was the size of Hungary’s. The ENTIRE US economy revolved around the private sector. After wwii they decided to just keep the military industrial complex that had power wwii in business, what followed was manufactured wars like vietnam and iraq, and the lies that go with them.
          Climate science racket is the same type animal, big government puts money out there, the beneficiaries are conglomerates that do this type of research and are profiting from it, it becomes a self perpetuating business.. that’s why when it starts actually getting colder since 1997-they start fabricating charts so they can say ‘warming pause’.. if they say ‘cooling’ the scam is over..just like you can’t have iraq war w/o those fake iraqi WMDs. meanwhile the entire US economy is dependent on these big government rackets, the big government can’t possibly ask the taxpayer to fund all this stuff that’s keeping everyone employed so they borrow money from foreigners and debase the currency.
          Roman empire did the same thing, started off as a great free enterprise economy based on the private sector but eventually everyone was dependent on big government. This particular climate science corruption is going to hurt the USA even more because the mini-ice age is coming and with it will come the wheat crop failures.. we didn’t do anything to prepare for the real climate change because it would have interfered with the global warming scammers racket so they shout down anyone that tries to warn about global cooling.

      • DD More says:

        Bleak, be careful using the $400 toilet seat example.
        The famous toilet seat came about when about twenty Navy planes had to be rebuilt to extend their service life. The onboard toilets required a uniquely shaped fiberglass piece that had to satisfy specifications for the vibration resistance, weight, and durability. The molds had to be specially made as it had been decades since the planes original production. The price of the “seats” reflected the design work and the cost of the equipment to manufacture them.

        The problem arose because the top level drawing for the toilet assembly referred to the part being purchased as a“Toilet Seat” instead of its proper nomenclature of “Shroud”. The Navy had made a conscious decision at the time, not to pay the OEM of the aircraft the thousands of dollars it would take to update their top level drawing in order to fix this mistake in nomenclature.

        Later some unknown Senate staffer combing lists of military purchases for the Golden Fleece Awards found “Toilet Seat – $600” and trumpeted it to the news media as an example of “government waste.” The Senate then wrote into the appropriations bill that this item would not be purchased for anything more than $140.00. The shroud has never been purchased since, as no one can make the shroud at that price.

        President Reagan had actually held a televised news conference, where he held up one of these shrouds. During the press conference, he explained the true story. The media of the time, and still today, incorrectly reports that the Pentagon was paying $640.00 for a $12.00 toilet seat. ”

        • laughing Out Loud says:

          I believe I heard one of the dim-bulbs during the Republican Presidential debate regurgitate that Lie with reference to hammers and such—no surprise there. By the way, one of the buyers at my firm received a quote to reproduce one legacy circuit board for a business jet control unit… the price: $8,000.00.

    • Andy DC says:

      When some party has an agenda and a vested financial interest, any tampering of data on their part should be viewed suspiciously. When the adjustments have a strong net effect to support said agenda and financial interest, they should be assumed corrupt until otherwise proven in simple terms that are easily understandable and undeniable.

      In other words, Martin, the burden of proof lies with you and not with us!

    • Steven Douglas says:

      “We know there have been scientists who have filed false expense reports, but that’s not what Eisenhower was talking about.”

      Then why the red herring? Climate science aside, we also know that there have been myriad scientists in various fields who have completely falsified data and published equally falsified papers. Were you aware of that or are you being deliberately obtuse?

      Eisenhower’s words weren’t ‘evidence’ at all. It was pure reason, logic and common sense that has since proved prophetic, as their is now ample evidence more than 50 years later that what he said was “gravely to be regarded” was spot on, and has come to full fruition. The bulk of science dances to the political science piper, and you’ve proved yourself to be one of its toadies on the sidelines, given that it happens to tickle your equally political sensibilities.

  2. Martin Smith says:

    Name names, Steven. List each climate scientist by name together with your evidence that he or she has committed fraud or is guilty of corruption.

  3. Martin Smith says:

    Steven, you are saying scientists are susceptible to corruption. That means all scientists, so the few scientists who hold your contrarian, anti-AGW view are subject to the same susceptibility. Which is more likely: Are the few scientists who are anti-AGW and who derive their funding from oil and coal companies and the Heartland Institute more, or less, likely to be corrupt than ALL the scientists who have done science that agrees with AGW and who get their funding from taxes?

    • I get exactly zero dollars funding. You are pathetic Winston.

    • Gail Combs says:

      Marty says:
      “…Are the few scientists… who derive their funding from oil and coal companies…. likely to be corrupt..”

      Well if you want to equate Oil Money with corruption than it is real easy to list them.

      You can start with Phil Jones and his buddies at the CRU (funded by Oil and Nuclear money).

      Or Mueller of the BEST data set with his links to Shell Oil via Marlan Downey, “Former President of the international subsidiary of Shell Oil”

      Of course the best examples are Robert Watson who worked for the World Bank while Chair of the IPCC. Shell Oil exec Doug McKay who was at the IPCC scenario meetings (per e-mails). McKay was also Senior Financial Analyst with the World Bank. Just like Maurice Strong was involved with oil, the Rockefellers (trustee of foundation) and Senior advisor of the World Bank.

      The big one is the IPCC Lead Author who wrote those Scenarios Ged Davis VP of Shell Oil.

      HEY MARTY! SHELL OIL WROTE AGENDA 21! – get that through your thick skull.

      In the climategate e-mails you find the Ged Davis draft for Sustainable Development aka Agenda 21. Of particular interest is in this optimum scenario, there is No Nuclear, Coal and Oil are phased out leaving Natural gas as the winner with ‘Green Energy’ also owned by BP, Shell and their internationalist buddies, as the big winners.

      4. Sustainable Development (B1)

      The central elements of this scenario family include high levels of environmental and social consciousness, successful governance including major social innovation, and reductions in income and social inequality. Successful forms of governance allow many problems which are currently hard or difficult to resolve to fall within the competency of government and other organisations….. The concerns over global sustainable development, expressed in a myriad of environmental and social issues, results in the eventual successful management of the interaction between human activities and the biosphere…. Besides cleaning up air quality, there is emphasis on improving the availability and quality of water. [no doubt the coming scam since the econuts are refusing to allow additional dams to be built. – gc]

      …The impact of environmental concerns is a significant factor in the planning for new energy systems. Two alternative energy systems, leading to two sub-scenarios, are considered to provide this energy:

      1. Widespread expansion of natural gas, with a growing role for renewable energy (scenario B1N). Oil and coal are of lesser importance, especially post-2050. This transition is faster in the developed than in the developing countries…

      • David A says:

        Gail, not relevant to funding, off topic, to long, and racist.
        Saved you another post Marty.

      • Jason Calley says:

        What?! Big Oil makes money from renewable energy?! Hmmmm…. Come to think of it, the photovoltaic panels on my off-grid, carbon negative (not just neutral), retreat out in the woods were made by British Petroleum — and that was 18 years ago when I bought them.

        By the way, one of the big ideas of why Big Oil might like CO2 taxes is as follows. A major method for CO2 sequestration is to inject the CO2 underground. That is a GREAT deal for oil producers. You take the CO2, get paid for injecting it and storing it, and at the same time use the CO2 to pressurize old and failing oil fields so that the last drops of petroleum can be pumped. Without CO2 sequestration, the companies would have to pay out of their own pockets to pressurize the fields. With CO2 limits they can actual get a check sent to them for doing the same thing.Yahoo! Time to bribe some governmental agencies to claim that CO2 sequestration is so badly needed.

    • Gonzo says:

      Well marty since a self admitted “liberal atheist from New York city” Gavin Schmidt is the head of NASA-GISS then yeah I’d say he’s susceptible to corruption. Anything for the cause.

      • Gail Combs says:

        Gavin Schmidt is also a LIAR

        Gavin A. Schmidt is a climatologist, climate modeler…

        Born: United Kingdom
        Employer: Goddard Institute for Space Studies
        School, University of Oxford, Jesus College, Oxford, University College London

    • lorne50 says:

      Shaking my flipen head Marty you have got to be the stupidus person in this part of the milky way . I feel bad for your parents!

    • AndyG55 says:

      It seems that little Marty is posting mostly from his workplace. (quote “I’m going home now”)

      That either means that he is being PAID to post…

      or he is posting without his employer’s knowledge. The latter is likely to get him fired should be discovered, as it is the utmost in DISHONESTY and CORRUPTION.

      DISHONESTY and CORRUPTION seems to be what Marty most supports..

      It is part of his very persona. It is who he is.

    • sam says:

      Hey Martin, if BigOil and Gas is SO threatened by alternative energy sources like solar panels and windtubines, AND they have billions in profits and even $100 million dollars to donate to pro AGW groups(which is a FACT); WHY don’t they just BUY the companies that manufacture alternative energy, why don’t they just get into the solar panel and wind turbine business?
      I mean when the internet came out, AT&T just got into that communication medium, they didn’t try to stifle the technology so we all keep using big pushbutton landline phones. Toyota and GM now manufacture electric cars.. Historically BIG corporations have always seeked out new technologies because they are the ones with the deep pockets to invest in them. I have asked this question numerous times to AGW liars AND NEVER got a strait answer..

  4. skeohane says:

    How much electro-shock treatment does it take to get the amount of brain damage Winston exhibits?

  5. M. Winston Smith: 6 posts
    Everyone else: 8 posts

    Next: M. Wimston Smith accuses others of spamming to bury his comtributions. 😀

    • Gail Combs says:

      Of course he will drag out ‘spamming’ Colorado, he does not want us to turn his accusations around and nail his gods.

      • annieoakley says:

        I think Martin is the one being paid to post.

        • Gail Combs says:

          He posted for eight straight hours starting at 8:00am on the dot yesterday….

        • AndyG55 says:

          And in one post, he actually said something like.. “That’s enough for today I’m going home.. ”

          Either he is being paid specifically to troll and spam this site,

          or he is doing it on his employer’s dime., in which case I wonder if his employer knows ?

    • DD More says:

      Mindless Martin. A mind washed, kool-aid drinking (the purple kind), bot who cannot change. His only hope is to be able to show his work to the “global overpopulation elite” with the hope that they will believe he was a follower and not be culled. Others have identified his type as “Useful Idiots”.

      Here are the people he is defending.

      • Gail Combs says:

        It makes perfect sense. The elite want ALL the Marbles. They want all the resources for THEM and their progeny plus some number of slaves to wait on them hand and foot.

        It is why ~10% of the men who reside within the borders of the Mongol Empire as it was at the death of Genghis Khan may carry his Y chromosome, and so ~0.5% of men in the world, about 16 million individuals alive today, do so. 1 in 200 men direct descendants of Genghis Khan.

  6. rah says:

    The longer I have studied Ike the more I have come to respect the man. All the pure crap, both military and political that man had to deal with while Supreme commander at SHAEF more than prepared him for the presidency. Imagine trying to deal with FDR, Churchill, Bernard Law Montgomery, Charles de Gaulle, Patton, and a whole host of other less prominent demagogues while at the same time being responsible for the planning and conduct of the most complex military operation in history. I don’t think any other historical figure from the time or any time, other that Winston Churchill, was in the same league at being able to herd as many cats at the same time when the stakes were so high.

    • Gail Combs says:

      I really would like Ike for president again! As far as I am concerned he was the last really decent president we had.

      (Reagan gave us the leveraged buyout/hostile takeover fiasco that set the USA up for the major loss of manufacturing and jobs to China and India.)

      • Jason Calley says:

        Ike? Yes, much better than anyone since. I can barely remember watching his last speech on a small black and white TV. (Can I still say “black and white” without being accused of racism?) I have been told that in the original draft of his farewell speech that he spoke of the “congressional-military-industrial complex” but decided later to leave out the “congressional” part of the name.

        • Ted says:


        • Jason Calley says:

          Hey Ted, that was long ago… now I own a TV of color.

          (Actually, I do not own ANY TV for the last 20 years or so. Why should I buy a device to facilitate the delivery of garbage to my house?)

        • Gail Combs says:

          I beat you. I haven’t had a TV for forty year as of this year.

        • Ted says:


          You own a TV of color?
          You people make me sick.

          I’ll admit to sharing my home with a TV. It’s a 15″ television of color, and it’s accompanied me since my 13th birthday. But in my defense, I haven’t had cable (or satellite) for over 20 years. I don’t get any channels over the air anymore, so it’s only good for watching DVDs, which I do when I can’t get to sleep. Believe it or not, “An Inconvenient Truth” is one of my favorites. It’s never failed to put me to sleep within half an hour.

        • Jason Calley says:

          Gail, yes, you have me beat! There is a reason why they call it “programming.” The idiot box will warp the thinking of any rational person. There may be a rare exception or two, but as a general rule it is like an addictive and destructive drug.

          And Ted…you have a WICKED sense of humor. (Keep it up! Best laugh I have had today.)
          I too watch DVDs now and then on my PC, but one has a lot more control over what memes sneak into your head with movies vs MSM.

      • Richard Keen says:

        Forty-seven years ago I’d have been happy to have Ike as my Commander-in-Chief, someone who treated war and something to get done and over with as effectively as possible.
        Instead, I got Lyndon B Johnson.

        • Gail Combs says:

          Lyndon B Johnson is the S.O.B. that made sure Christians lost their political power.

          Most churches in America have organized as “501c3 tax-exempt religious organizations.” This is a fairly recent trend that has only been going on for about fifty years. Churches were only added to section 501c3 of the tax code in 1954. We can thank Sen. Lyndon B. Johnson for that. Johnson was no ally of the church. As part of his political agenda, Johnson had it in mind to silence the church and eliminate the significant influence the church had always had on shaping “public policy.”

          Although Johnson proffered this as a “favor” to churches, the favor also came with strings attached (more like shackles). One need not look far to see the devastating effects 501c3 acceptance has had to the church, and the consequent restrictions placed upon any 501c3 church. 501c3 churches are prohibited from addressing, in any tangible way, the vital issues of the day….

          The 501c3 has had a “chilling effect” upon the free speech rights of the church. LBJ was a shrewd and cunning politician who seemed to well-appreciate how easily many of the clergy would sell out.

          Did the church ever need to seek permission from the government to be exempt from taxes? Were churches prior to 1954 taxable? No, churches have never been taxable. To be taxable a church would first need to be under the jurisdiction, and therefore under the taxing authority, of the government. The First Amendment clearly places the church outside the jurisdiction of the civil government: “Congress shall make NO LAW respecting an establishment of religion, nor prohibiting the free exercise thereof.”…

          Of course 501c3 tax-exempt status DOES NOT silence, WWF, Greenpeace, the Sierra Club and other groups.

          Heck far from kicking them out of politics, we get EPA’s Secret And Costly ‘Sue And Settle’ Collusion With Environmental Organizations

          “Sue and Settle “ practices, sometimes referred to as “friendly lawsuits”, are cozy deals through which far-left radical environmental groups file lawsuits against federal agencies wherein court-ordered “consent decrees” are issued based upon a prearranged settlement agreement they collaboratively craft together in advance behind closed doors. Then, rather than allowing the entire process to play out, the agency being sued settles the lawsuit by agreeing to move forward with the requested action they and the litigants both want….

          While the environmental group is given a seat at the table, outsiders who are most impacted are excluded, with no opportunity to object to the settlements. Accordingly, both the litigants and the defendant agency, operating in coffee bars and friendly courtroom shadows, avoid the harsh outside glare of oversight. No public notice about the settlement is released until the agreement is filed in court…after the damage has been done….

        • gator69 says:

          The Black Robe Regiment is a resource and networking entity where church leaders and laypeople can network and educate themselves as to our biblical responsibility to stand up for our Lord and Savior and to protect the freedoms and liberties granted to a moral people in the divinely inspired US Constitution. The Regiment had its historical beginnings during the Revolutionary War when Pastors from across the colonies arose and lead their congregations into the battle for freedom. Unlike today, the church during this time served as the center-point for political debate and discussion on the relevant news of the day. Today’s church leaders have all but lost that concept of leading their congregations in a Godly manner in all aspects of their worldly existence and are afraid to speak out against the progressive agenda that has dominated our political system for the past century. Through this time the church and God himself has been under assault, marginalized, and diminished by the progressives and secularists. The false wall of separation of church and state has been constructed in such a manner that most are unaware of its limited boundaries. The church and the body of Christ has been attacked on all fronts and challenged by the progressive courts and groups such as the ACLU while we have sat idle in consent.

          The time has come that we must now arise and awaken to the danger of this hyper-progressive agenda that so permeates every aspect of our political, legal, and educational systems. It is time now to educate ourselves and push back against the erosion of our freedoms and liberties and restore the constitutional authority back to all aspects of our governance. It will take the leaders of our churches to shepherd their flocks as did their predecessors during our first fight for liberty.


        • rah says:

          I’ll agree that LBJ was an SOB but not for the same reasons. LBJ was the 2nd worst president of my life time because he committed regular US troops to combat in Vietnam and then tried to play general with his “wiz kids” from the oval office with no intention of defeating the enemy. It was under his administration that politically motivated highly restrictive Rules of Engagement tying the hands of the military commanders were first instituted. He was “New Dealer” and the primary founder of the modern welfare state under the nomenclatures of “The Great Society” and “The War on Poverty” there by laying the foundation for the continued expansion of Federal power.

        • Gail Combs says:

          LBJ was an all round SOB. Some even think he was behind the JFK assassination.

          For example Jackie Kennedy believed Lyndon Johnson killed JFK

        • Richard Keen says:

          Gail Combs says: January 15, 2016 at 12:41 pm LBJ was an all round SOB
          Well, I don’t want to impugn his parents (not knowing them), but I certainly did not like working for him. I was much relieved when Nixon became my C-in-Chief.
          Not only did LBJ enjoy micro-managing the war (today we’ll bomb up to the 18th parallel, tomorrow we’ll bomb the rubber plant in Phuoc Yoo, etc.), he also tossed away the our victory in the Tet Offensive. Instead of tossing in a surge to mop up after that, LBJ meekly decided to retire, leaving the US (and S Vietnam) without leadership for a year.
          So Nixon gets in, helps build up the S Viet forces, they (with our help) whup the N Viets in the ’72 invasion, another hard fought victory. So what do we do? The Dem congress cuts off military aid to S Vietnam, proudly announces we will not help them if the N Viets invade again. So of course what happens.
          I see the Dems doing this again in Iraq.
          Meanwhile, as a Private E-1 making pennies an hour I was being taxed for LBJ’s Great Society.
          But I never did, and do not now, ever thought he was involved in JFK’s assassination.

      • Andy DC says:

        Ike was certainly underrated in his time. I agree, the most uncorrupted, competent, trustworthy President of my lifetime and an awful lot smarter than the liberal media gave him credit for.

        • rah says:

          Ike was hampered by a strong Democrat congress controlled by a New Deal coalition that blocked many of his domestic initiatives during most of his presidency. It was in fact notable that he was able to get as much done as he did on the front considering the opposition he faced. He strongly supported the building of the Interstate system having admired Hitlers autobahns and how effective such high speed lines of communications were during the invasion of Germany. But during his second term he became frustrated and basically told congress to “F-off” and spent more time on the putting green. (When Jackie Kennedy moved into her Camelot she was appalled that Ikes golf shoe cleats had marred the floors in the west wing in places and immediately started totally redecorating and some remodeling of the WH despite the fact that Truman had already had the greatest renovation done since the Brits torched it in 1814.) Despite taking it much easier during his second term Ike did however continue to lead very effectively in foreign policy as he had from the beginning.

        • DougM says:

          If you haven’t read it, I highly recommend Ike’s Bluff, by Evan Thomas. It provides a really good biographical history of President Eisenhower’s 2 terms in office. He was a shrewd man with an innate ability to “read” his opposition and out-maneuver his opponents. One of the best Presidents of the 20th Century, if not the entire history of the country.

        • A lesser man would have never succeeded in his position during WWII. I believe that people with low opinion of Eisenhower as President—including historians—are ignorant or dumb.

        • rah says:

          The great historian Stephan Ambrose wrote two biographies on Ike. One covering his time as Supreme Allied Commander and the other his whole life.



          I would highly recommend both since Ambrose spent a lot of time with Ike personally interviewing him and was a pure historian. My only criticism of either work is that IMO Ambrose does at times deflect or soft peddle some criticism Ike was due at times. Such as his failure to step in and over rule Bradley holding back Patton from attempting to close the Falaise Gap when Patton most likely could have done it and saved on heck of a lot of Canadian and Polish casualties while trapping many more Germans.

          This is not to say Ambrose omits facts or alters them, but is to say it is obvious in his writing that Ambrose truly admired the man an that occasionally colors his judgments though not his faithful telling of the tales.

        • Richard Keen says:

          Andy DC says: January 15, 2016 at 1:01 pm Ike was certainly underrated in his time. I agree, the most uncorrupted, competent, trustworthy President of my lifetime and an awful lot smarter than the liberal media gave him credit for.
          Andy, agreed on all counts. The lefty media certainly liked to paint him as lazy and slow of thought and as preferring golfing to leading (unlike BO, right?), but they do that with anyone who is to the right of bolzhevism. To wit….
          George W Bush: how many books of “bush-isms” are there, compared to the number of “obamanation” tomes?
          Ronald Reagan: treated as old and senile while he walked & talked circles around the libs.
          Sarah Palin: called a dim bulb, but the only one of the four candidates in ’08 who could utter a coherent sentence without a teleprompter.
          Ben Carson: a brain surgeon, of all things, who must be stupid because he doubts global warming.
          So Ike, who outfoxed Rommel at Normandy, was likewise stupid and incapable of rational decision making.

  7. gator69 says:

    Martin Smith says:
    January 14, 2016 at 12:53 pm
    No, Steven, Eisenhower spoke about the military industrial complex, not climate science.

    • Ted says:


      You don’t understand. Liberals get to define all terms, in all discussions, with no regard to their common usage. Hence child murder becomes “choice”, the right of the people to keep and bear arms becomes “you can keep an unloaded musket locked in a government controlled safe, only if you’re in the military, and only the government says you can”, and Dr. King’s dream of a colorblind society becomes “only white people are capable of racism”.

      In comparison, science=ONLY military projects, is fairly tame. A liberal who was strong with the force would insist that Ike was using the military industrial complex as code for Christianity.

      • gator69 says:

        I have to agree with your points, but must disagree with the nomenclature. I am a Libertarian who understands the root of the word liberal, and folks like Marty are not about liberties, they want central control. I prefer to call them what they really are, leftists or Progressives. That way we properly identify the real trouble makers, and come together with true liberals.

        • Gail Combs says:

          That is why I use Progressive (Socialist/Fabian/Communist) vs Classic Liberal

        • Jason Calley says:

          I prefer “so-called Progressives” or perhaps, “self styled Progressives.” I do not want to associate their ideas with the actual meaning of “Progress” so I try to point out the falsity of the name.

          How many people know the origin of the name “Bolshevik”? When the communists were still a tiny splinter group, they adopted the name Bolshevik, meaning “majority”. Whenever the papers reported on some action by the Bolsheviks, it reenforced in the reader’s mind the idea that they were the majority party.

        • Gail Combs says:

          Jasson, not a bad idea. Would be Masters is another good name for the scum.

        • David A says:

          Perhaps the term “statist” is most accurate if one seeks brevity.

          So not for you Gail. (-;

        • Jason Calley says:

          Hey David! Yes, statist is a very good term. Collectivist (as opposed to indivualist) is not bad either. Pragmatically put, I tend to think of them like this: An individualist wants to control his or her own life. A collectivist wants to control his or her own life, and yours as well.

        • David A says:

          Yes, I like collectivist. However on a recent thread Marty tried to explain how the Scandanavian nations were not socialist, but collectivist. I KNEW if I told him they were the same thing he would argue like a fool, so I instead asked him a series of questions until he, unaware. stated they were the same. It really was hysterical, but missed by most in the long “Socialism” thread with the breadline photo.

          Gail just when I accuse you of a lack of brevity, you post ano word post. Alas, the phrase, brevity is the soul of wit, can not be applied to myself either.

        • Ted says:

          I stand corrected.

          But my mistake only proves my point. They’ve redefined “liberal” so completely that I used the term without thinking, even while arguing that they debate by redefinition.

          Incidentally, my vote for the correct term to describe the American left would be statist. It’s truly shocking to compare their rhetoric of today to that of the 60’s. Remember when “The Man” was the enemy?

        • Richard Keen says:

          Jason Calley says: January 14, 2016 at 7:24 pm
          …the name Bolshevik, meaning “majority”. …
          … Bolshevik = “majority” = Consensus

        • Gail Combs says:

          There are really only two different political systems. They depend on whether your view point is that the individual should serve the State or whether the State is there to protect the rights of the individual. It really is that simple.

          So perhaps the correct term is Progressive Wannabe Slaves since those who are Progressives/Socialists/Communists and even muslims, ALL want to give the rights they were born with away to the Elite running the State.

          This is also one of the reasons islam is allowed to run free and is even imported to non-muslim countries. The Elite do not give a hoot what religion is used to control the masses as long as that religion TELLS the masses the elite have the right to rule them.

          For over a thousand years in Europe it was the Catholic church. Now the Elite are looking at islam. No wonder the Pope and Anglican Archbishop were so quick to jump on the Greenie bandwagon. They were aware that if they DO NOT show the Elite they have control over the minds of people they WILL be replace with islam.

          I think what we are seeing is a bit of behind the scenes a power play with us as pawns.

  8. David A says:

    Well lunch is over, off to ski before more snow tomorrow, here in California.

  9. lorne50 says:

    You guys do notice he did it again and it’s all about Marty again not the post

  10. Gail Combs says:

    gator69 says: ” The Black Robe Regiment….”

    I am glad some are finally waking up. I was horrified when I was trying to wake people up the the ‘Food Safety Modernization’ scam that the churchs, our community non-political leaders, had been muzzled. The funding controlled NGOs are the Elites replacement for the vacuum left by the muzzling of the churches. An innovation of Maurice Strong (may he rot in Hades) based on his work with the YMCA.

    • gator69 says:

      Hey Gail! I meant to ask you earlier if you went with a metal roof this time.

      • Gail Combs says:

        I tried. The roofers took one look at the three storied house with a steep pitch and freaked! We ended up with a 40 year white shingle since that was what we could afford. Turns out that was a better decision because the company willing to put on the metal roof was going to go over the shingles. Instead we had the shingles ripped off.

        Turns out Nationwide really screwed us. The shingles they used have a sticky tar strip covered by plastic that had to be removed at installation. The sticky strip that holds the down hill side of the shingle in place. Nationwide NEVER REMOVED THE PLASTIC. No wonder we had the roof shedding shingles like a dog sheds hair! On top of having to constantly replace shingles, no tar strip meant the wind drove rain under the shingles and we had the underlayment (strand board) all rotted. SO we ended up having to replace a lot of the underlayment and that cost another thousand plus.

        Turns out Nationwide never put in the vapor barrier in the walls so we have some rot under the vinyl siding too. The quality of the Nationwide modulars really sucks. Hubby even had to rewire the electric outlet for the dryer and stove to keep the house from burning down. That doesn’t include a bunch of other problems….

        Needless to say I do not recommend a Nationwide Modular!

        • gator69 says:

          Since this is to be my retirement home I kept everything on one level (except the basement), and that means a larger roof. My original roof was an Owens-Corning 30 year architectural shingle, properly installed, that only lasted 7 years. We stripped that to the plywood, put down heavy felt, and then installed the metal. It cost me nearly double, but worth every penny.

        • A roofer not removing the protective plastic is the equivalent of a bricklayer forgetting to use mortar between bricks. I’ve seen more of such absolutely incompetent work lately, especially from contractors with poor business practices that rely on the crews’ understanding of their trade without ever training or testing their knowledge. Typically, there is also bad onsite management.

          I had an interesting interaction with a reputable roofing company’s owner over a decade ago. His crew did a pretty decent job on most of the work but they hurried and did sloppy work in some places, left exposed ‘shiners’, laid down the ridge cap the wrong way against our predominant westerly wind and didn’t fully cleanup the tear off mess around the house. His scatterbrained “onsite” manager—who only came once at the very beginning and never saw the final work—argued in his email responses first that he didn’t understand what I’m saying, then that the ridge cap was laid down right, then that west was really in the east, and finally that it was cloudy when he came and he couldn’t see the sun so I should have told him where west was!*)

          When I gave up on him and called the owner, I got a brief pushback first but when I showed him the evidence he sent the crew to fix everything and gave me the discount I wanted for the inconvenience and extra work I had to do. I think he was a good guy who understood roofing but probably didn’t follow his manager’s work closely enough. It was clear that a less experienced customer would have never caught the mistakes and probably wouldn’t have prevailed in the dispute.

          *) Richard “Racehorse” Haynes again!


        • Gail Combs says:


          The roofer we finally went with said he went through over 100 employees the first year trying to put together a decent crew. Around here most in construction are Mexican/Latino and in many cases do not speak or read English well if at all. Because they work for less $$$ they get hired while the competent Americans do not.

          The crew I had working on my place was Mexican but they knew the job. The boss was a Seminole from Florida. All of them were really nice guys. The boss brought his family over yesterday to play with the baby goats since his daughter loves goats.

  11. rah says:

    Well Gail I sincerely hope that is the last roof you’ll ever have to put over your head and provides you the years of trouble free protection/service you need. That is after all the objective isn’t it?

    • Gail Combs says:

      It certainly is! I wish I had done the Weatherometer and Fadeometer testing on the shingles first though. (The window weather seals ARE material I have done testing on in the past and are holding up very nicely even after 20 years.)

  12. Lou says:

    It may sound strange but it may have to do with ET technology. He specified military type. It didn’t occur to me till recently when someone brought up his loony grand daughter Laura over ET stuff. Google it and you will get a bunch of ETs stuff. Is it true? I have no idea. http://www.independent.co.uk/news/science/did-churchill-and-eisenhower-cover-up-ufo-encounter-2043641.html It gets much stranger as you go deeper in the rabbit hole. I kept asking my self “WTF, what’s going on???” over and over and over. However, it would not surprise me. You just have to know where to look for since you’ve had plenty of practice over global warming scam. I guess it made more sense to me but how to explain to others? Screw it. It’s like trying to prove that global warming is scam but this is even harder to explain because it’s not like they’ve done studies and put them in public mainframe for everyone to check out. That reminds me… X-Files is back next week…

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *