Four Questions For Climahysteric Cap ‘N Taxers

29 Jun, 2009 by William Teach

Print this article Font size -16+

With the passage of the massively insane Waxman-Markey cap and tax bill, here are four questions to ask those who support it, particularly the politicians who voted for it and AGW leaders such as Al Gore

1. Did you read the bill before throwing your support behind it? Did you read the 300 page dead of night attachment before voting for it?

We pretty much know the answer is “nyet,” but, it is worth asking, especially of your Congress Critter.

2. Will you follow the principles of Waxman-Markey even if it does not pass the Senate?

You voted for it, you support it, isn’t it about time to live the life it pushes? You should make sure you drive a micro-mobile that uses very little gasoline, better yet, walk or ride a bike. You should pay to make sure all your appliances are the “greenest” possible, plant tons of trees on your property, limit your use of the toilet and the shower, take public transportation, etc and so on. If you aren’t sure of what all you should be doing, then READ THE BILL!!!!!!!!!

3. If it passes the Senate, and Obama signs it in to law, who will you blame when the price of everything, as well as your taxes, skyrocket?

You can’t blame Bush, Cheney, Rove, and/or Republicans for this one. You can’t blame the EVIL!!!!! Big Oil companies. The only people to blame are the ones in the Donkey Mirror. Will you man up and accept it, or do you typical “blame everyone else” gig?

4. What is the end game, what is the outcome, what do you hope to accomplish?

Of course, they will say “Lower CO2 output so we save the Earth from Mankind!” But, this is not the Underwear Nome model

Pass cap and tax
??????
Lower Co2

It’s more like

Pass cap and tax
Control every aspect of people’s lives around energy to reduce CO2
????

So what, exactly, do you want Waxman-Markey to accomplish? Reducing CO2 is not the endgame, it is a step towards….something. Tells us what that something is. Is it to reduce global temperatures? Is it to stop the minor 1.8 degree Farenheit overall global temperature rise since the end of the Little Ice Age? Tell us. Because the rest of the anthropogenic global warming bills and such from around the world, including Kyoto, really have done nothing but increase peoples costs for little to no reduction in CO2 and temperature. Nor did they intend to do anything to stop AGW.

So, you must have something in mind for the long term outcome. Please, share. Tell us. You whined for years that Bush didn’t have an “exit strategy” for Iraq. You must have some sort of final resolution from implementing this draconian cost increase legislation, right?

The end game wouldn’t be something like “have complete control over everyone’s lives,” would it?

We could probably ask a 5th question “why will you not allow any voices that disagree to be raised?” but we know the answer: because it would destroy the narrative that Mankind is responsible for global warming, rather than something that makes sense, natural processes, primarily the Sun. Case in point

Over the coming days a curiously revealing event will be taking place in Copenhagen. Top of the agenda at a meeting of the Polar Bear Specialist Group (set up under the International Union for the Conservation of Nature/Species Survival Commission) will be the need to produce a suitably scary report on how polar bears are being threatened with extinction by man-made global warming.

This is one of a steady drizzle of events planned to stoke up alarm in the run-up to the UN’s major conference on climate change in Copenhagen next December. But one of the world’s leading experts on polar bears has been told to stay away from this week’s meeting, specifically because his views on global warming do not accord with those of the rest of the group.

Dr Mitchell Taylor has been researching the status and management of polar bears in Canada and around the Arctic Circle for 30 years, as both an academic and a government employee. More than once since 2006 he has made headlines by insisting that polar bear numbers, far from decreasing, are much higher than they were 30 years ago. Of the 19 different bear populations, almost all are increasing or at optimum levels, only two have for local reasons modestly declined.

He is a Denier, a climate skeptic, if you will, so, they do not want to hear from him. Ask yourselves why, climahysterics. And, more importantly, ask yourselves why, elected leaders who voted for cap and tax.

Also, ask yourselves why you want to potentially start a trade war.

Crossed at Pirate’s Cove