Free Markets, Free People

Climate change is one of Obama’s “top three priorities” in second term

If you love ObamaCare,  you’re sure to be thrilled with whatever comes out of this attempt to cash in on taxing thin air.  Climate change is going to be a “priority” because it would be a new source of revenue, nothing more:

President Obama has identified climate change as one of his top three priorities in his second term after coming under fire from environmentalists for giving the issue short shrift during the campaign.

The president, in an interview for TIME’s Person of the Year award, said the economy, immigration, climate change and energy would be at the top of his agenda for the next four years.

The interview took place before the fatal shootings at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Connecticut, an incident that had pushed gun control to a top spot on Obama’s agenda.

Obama said his daughters have influenced his thinking about the need to tackle climate change.

“[O]n an issue like climate change, for example, I think for this country and the world to ask some very tough questions about what are we leaving behind, that weighs on you. And not to mention the fact I think that generation is much more environmentally aware than previous generations,” he told TIME.

The comments continued a trend of Obama vowing to focus on climate without laying out details of his agenda.

You have to be stunned by the irony of his statements.  The man has been “influenced” by indoctrinated children.  Just as stunning is his statement about asking “tough questions about what we are leaving behind”. One has to wonder if he’s looked at the record debt he’s piling on which will have to be paid by future generation in their standard of living, taxes and productivity.    Now he wants to add more cost to that future by involving government in regulating CO2.

That despite the fact, no inspite of the fact, that the science he’d base his “priority” upon has simply fallen apart.

The analysis of global combined land and ocean surface temperature in [the IPCC’s draft report] is inadequate for what it admits is seen as the prime statistic of global warming. It is highly selective in the references it quotes and in the use of time periods which obscures important, albeit inconvenient, aspects of the temperature data. It is poorly drafted, often making a strong assertion, and then somewhat later qualifying if not contradicting it by admitting its statistical insignificance.

Real science simply doesn’t agree with the alarmist creed established by Al Gore, the UN IPCC and the other prophets of doom:

We can now estimate, based on observations, how sensitive the temperature is to carbon dioxide. We do not need to rely heavily on unproven models. Comparing the trend in global temperature over the past 100-150 years with the change in “radiative forcing” (heating or cooling power) from carbon dioxide, aerosols and other sources, minus ocean heat uptake, can now give a good estimate of climate sensitivity. The conclusion – taking the best observational estimates of the change in decadal-average global temperature between 1871-80 and 2002-11, and of the corresponding changes in forcing and ocean heat uptake – is this: a doubling of CO2 will lead to a warming of 1.6-1.7C. This is much lower than the IPCC’s current best estimate, 3C.

But a politician has an inherent ability to sniff out potential revenue sources even when they’re just faintly carried by the wind.

The result of such policy and legislation will be even worse of an economic disaster than ObamaCare.  The “solution” will cost us much more than the “problem” was ever worth in terms of GDP, jobs and economic progress.

However, Obama will then be able to report to his two daughters who’ve been feed the alarmist creed for years that he “did something”, even if that something was, as usual, with your money and has forced you to reprioritize your own life downward.

It is the nature of the beast – and unfortunately we continue to allow the beast to feed at will and seem to find it natural that the beast is involved in all aspects of our life.  All we argue about is which group we’re going to sacrifice to the beast.  This time it’s the “rich”.

Oh, and gun control is also a 2nd term “priority” – more on that later.


Tweet about this on TwitterShare on FacebookShare on Google+Share on TumblrShare on StumbleUponShare on RedditPin on PinterestEmail this to someone

34 Responses to Climate change is one of Obama’s “top three priorities” in second term

  • because it would be a new source of revenue, nothing more
    I have to disagree.
    Given that the solar energy gambit is pretty much down the tube with Solyndria et al, it’s time to find a new source of income for Obama’s crony capitalism.

    • I am sure Egon Musk is a big contributor, and Solar City will do well, as its all about using imported Chinese made equipment to install with a subsidy.
      This is the key with Silicon Valley greens…make overseas, sell in the USA, so a carbon taxes don’t affect their industries.

  • Once “King Obama the First” has been inaugurated, he will be bullet proof, politically. Having eliminated any source of political constraint by getting re-elected, the only way he can be dissuaded is by impeachment and so long as he controls one legislative house even that constraint is non-existent. So it is no wonder that his intentions are seriously to change the face of the US into one that mirrors his own political philsophy – whatever that may be. The future of the US is in the hands of a man whose basic indoctrination is somewhere to the left of Mao and we are left without any true means of countering his will. I trully fear for the Republic. – er um I mean Kingdom.

    • Oh, I have no fear for his Kingdom, I’m sure it will be as well established as anything he’s ever done and as well ruled as anything he’s ever ruled.

  • The goal, of course, is not merely revenue generation.
    It is to further the war on modernity so dear to the Collective.  It is…like everything else they love…about control.
    They intend for this to ramify throughout the economy and culture.  The goal is to compel Americans to live darker, shorter, less healthy, more uncomfortable, and less traveled lives.

    • Heh, correction, ‘some’ Americans.   Like the ones who read that Constitution thing at face value, and can’t find all the extra rights that are lurking in the corners and under various clauses every time we need yet another ‘right’.  The ones who don’t think rights came from government.  You know the ones I’m talking about, you probably ARE one.

      • Yes.  I ARE.  Which also makes me one of those that will fight this crap, and refuse to obey every chance I get.

      • It’s about time for a big SCOTUS ruling based on the 9th amendment

  • “Obama said his daughters have influenced his thinking about the need to tackle climate change.”
    Obama has twice as many daughters as Carter, so he gets twice the wisdom.

  • I’ll bet we could trade some offset carbon warming with the Russians right now.

  • Something to consider:
    The climate scientists I know (several, rather well) absolutely believe that the science of anthropogenic global warming is sound.  They’ll insist that if temperatures are rising too slowly to keep up with even the best-case scenario from IPCC4, let alone the worst case, that’s a temporary blip, on a timescale too short to matter.  The theory is sound, and temperatures will resume rising apace any time now.  The fact that the picture is a little more complicated than they thought doesn’t mean you throw away the whole analysis; you adjust it.
    What I’m getting at is, these people are by no means perpetrating a fraud.  To call it that would require them to believe they’re wrong, and they don’t, not for a second. That’s the problem: They’ve made the classic scientific blunder of falling too much in love with their theories to think critically anymore.  Add to that the fact that the policy solutions are in line with their politics, the people offering not-fully-informed objections are generally of a political bent they despise, and you have a very strong temptation to double down and defend their theory til hell freezes over.
    But what’s funny to me was seeing a cartoon on the door of one of them recently.  It depicts one climate scientist in a conference objecting: “Wait – what if we’re wrong about all this and we build a better world for nothing?”  And the caption lists all the good things that would result from following their prescriptions: Less pollution, renewable energy, cleaner air, more livable cities, etc.
    It’s perilously close to the admission, I don’t care if the theory is right – we should do these things anyway, and if my flawed advocacy science causes us to adopt these, I’m not sorry.

    • “and if my flawed advocacy science causes us to adopt these, I’m not sorry.”
      Because of course, they’re not planning on the effects of their flawed advocacy applying to them, the magic unicorn pony farts will continue to power their present lifestyles.

    • Like the old saying goes; “The road to hell is paved with good intentions”.

    • My left-of-center friend forced me to research GW after I admitted not knowing WTH was going on.
      As part of my research I discovered:
      1) The popular sources of info are useless.
      2) Some of the technical blogs are useful, but some are full of commenters and misleading information. (This applies to both sides) Or they start going into the weeds where I don’t understand anything. Therefore its hard to know what is what.
      3) The “science” changes very rapidly because of new research, new measuring technologies, and constant changes to old measurements as they are adjusted. (Note, adjusting can be a fine and good thing…but you can see how tempting it would be to adjust in your own favor.)
      4) Much of the “science” that has been reported is based on models. This is useful, but its often reported as “reality” when its not at all.
      5) Much of the science gets discarded or changed so often what you thought was true was false, or not important, i.e. China’s coal emissions are slowing temps, etc.
      6) Their very much are political groups out to confuse matters. Mainly on the government side. the IPCC must have a huge staff with high UN salaries, etc. They will not go quietly.
      7) More science now being done on actual physical measurements has been showing the problem, while it exists, is nowhere near as serious as people think.
      8) Much of the CO2 that would cause the warming is already in the air. Each time you double CO2, the effect gets smaller and smaller. Its logarithmic. So, unless you have a time machine, you probably won’t be able to do anything about it. Luckily, the CO2 factor looks like its much smaller than people assumed.
      9) 30 year time increments for measuring climate means many answers have to wait. This is true for both sides. Let’s say you have 150 years of good measurements…then you only have 5 actual data points. Now, you can uses Bayesian statistics and say, we probably are warming. But now we have 16
      + years of no additional warming. That is not something to just be dismissed. When you are talking trillions of dollars, at least.
      10) The big secret…climate change is very slow. People can simply adapt around it. We had people move to the sunbelt from the rustbelt. Was there any catastrophic dislocations? No, because people naturally move around every 20 years or whatever. Some islands will be messed up., yes. But parts of Siberia and Canada will open up. Issuing a visas to them, even without GW, would probably empty those islands in about an hour.
      11) The Left GW crowd think the solar scientists are all kooks. But the reality is that both can be right. We could be entering a solar cooling while some greenhouse affect warms us up a bit. That would give you what we see now. And again, every time you double CO2 the effect is logarithmic…less and less bang for your CO2 buck.
      12) The Left for all their cries of panic, don’t act like its a panic. And there is an expensive buy possible solution if you want to cut emissions quickly. Mandate electric cars and nuke plants. DONE. But that is not acceptable. They don’t care about a real solution. They want control and government.

      • The Left for all their cries of panic, don’t act like its a panic.

        And THAT is the acid test.  You have umty dozen bureaucrats flying to confer here and there, living like sultans.  Sorta gives you the impression is this almost NOTHING to do with the climate, and everything to do with another, less overt set of priorities.

      • Frankly, if global warming was a crisis, our politicians would ignore, so there has to be money involved.
        Even Al Gore has an oversized “carbon footprint” so it’s really hard to take it all seriously.

    • If the world believed that thing would be beautiful if I kicked you in the gonads, I’m sure that would be OK with you too ?

    • You know if your climate scientist friend met via teleconference rather than traveling will above average “carbon footprints” it might be easier not to impune their motives.

    • The climate scientists I know (several, rather well) absolutely believe that the science of anthropogenic global warming is sound.

      Well, they demonstrate a severe lack of knowledge of what the scientific process IS.
      If it were sound, it would be provable, but it doesn;t match any of the theory and the theory is so full of holes you can float a battleship through it.
      They may be sincere, but they’re naive at best and full of crap at worst.

  • So if they’re influencing policy his kids are now legitimate political targets yes? That can be fun

  • Meanwhile in Michigan, the education community has closed 33 schools for 2 days because of the impending Mayan Zombie Pocalypse for 2 days (and threw in the Newtown school shootings as an added bonus because, ya know, lunatics might happen).
    Wonder how many of these ‘educated’ people are firm believers in AGW.
    And yes, wow, won’t I look foolish if the world DOES end tomorrow because a bunch of ancient astronomers carved a calender in a rock,.  I expect I’ll feel as foolish as I did on January 1st, 2000 when society collapsed because all of us old COBOL programmers used 2 digit years to save space in memory and disk.

    • If it turns out the Magans were actually right, I’ll see you all at the Twinkie factory in Natick….

      • Can’t we meet at a Bimbo plant in Fort Worth?
        Fewer zombies   🙂

        • Sure Looker! When the world ends we’re all going to want as many bimbos as possible 🙂

          • And don’t ya just know WE will have big haired bimbos when the rest of ya’ll have completely run out of em.

    • You have to wonder if they have an orgasm ever time a clock flips over at midnight.

  • Let me guess, he’s going to focus, “Like a laser”.

  • Judging by progress on previous “priorities”, hopefully it won’t much matter.

    • Right.  IF he’s as dedicated to this as he has been to jobs…and how many times has that been his absolute NUMBER UNO priority…we have little to fear.

  • I just want to express my dissatisfaction.   This is either a very dull hell, or a crappy heaven.   The Mayans must have figured the end of the world looked like the day before the end if this is any indication.
    So much for my plan to hunt zombies today.

  • Ahhhh…..the all-knowing, all-compassionate and consummately rational EPA —–
    Here in Northern Virginia, the EPA (Eviscerate the Populace of America) has pronounced that rainwater run-off from your property that might somehow make its way into a river (Gee, how would it ever do that?  Guess there’s a first time for everything!) will be classified as a POLLUTANT being released into the waterways.
    So, rainwater is now a pollutant?
    Somehow, with the mis-administration of Ozymandias-on-the-Potomac, this IS totally consistent with their alternate-Utopian-universe worldview.
    Hang onto your wallets!

  • Heard this story from a nuclear engineer for an unnamed utility.

    It seems that had it not been for two nuclear power plants in New Jersey, all of New York City would have been dark during Sandy.