Free Markets, Free People

Delusional and desperate

I’m speaking of our POTUS. Yesterday at a commencement ceremony at the Coast Guard Academy, he declared that climate change was the biggest threat to our national security out there.

No. Really.

Even the ever malleable Jeb Bush couldn’t take that:

U.S. Republican Jeb Bush said on Wednesday that the Earth’s climate is changing but that scientific research does not clearly show how much of the change is due to humans and how much is from natural causes. While President Barack Obama and many scientists believe humans are largely to blame for climate change, Bush said the degree of human responsibility is uncertain. The former Florida governor challenged Obama’s determination earlier in the day that climate change is now a threat to U.S. national security.

It’s not just the degree of of change caused by humans in question but the effect of CO2.  But we “deniers” know that.  That and the fact that without a doubt the “evidence” which the alarmist have used has been fudged make any reasoning person “skeptical” of the declared “science”.   Add in the abysmally wrong models as well as the temperatures from the last 17 years and anyone who isn’t a skeptic has blinders on and isn’t interested in science.

But, with Iraq collapsing, Saudi Arabia buying nukes while Iran develops them, Lybia in chaos and a haven for ISIS, Syria imploding, Yemen falling to extremists, Egypt cozying up to Russia who is taking the Ukraine bit by bit and China is challenging us in the South China Sea, global warming climate change isn’t even on the radar screen as far as national security problems go.

No, the cult of climate change is precisely what Bush said it is:

The problem is climate change has been co-opted by the hard-core left and if you don’t march to their beat perfectly then you’re a denier.

And we all know what they want to do with “deniers”, don’t we?

So why are we hearing all this nonsense in the midst of all this chaos in the world?

In his frantic search for something positive for us to remember him by, President Obama has lately turned to “climate change,” casting it in recent weeks as a matter of health, of environmental protection, of international obligation, even as a matter of his daughter’s health. She suffered an asthma attack as a child, and he thinks the changing weather had something to do with it. Nothing has worked so far to persuade the public that everyone is doomed unless the government steps in to change the weather. President Obama is likely to find that manufactured climate hysteria won’t work.

Legacy.  He’s screwed absolutely everything else up during his tenure as president.  This might be his last shot at what he thinks will be a positive legacy.  If implemented, it would likely be just like the other monstrosities he’s now trying to run from.  But he’s going to try.

And reason 2?

With six months to go until the next global climate treaty talks in Paris, environmentalist and former US vice president Al Gore has declared that ‘the future of the world depends’ on their outcome. Lord Nigel Lawson, former energy secretary in Margaret Thatcher’s government, delivers his assessment of the prospects of the world reaching a new climate deal.

Everyone with consciousness knows nothing is going to change when they meet.

Spiegel journalist Axel Bojanowski calls it the “big climate show”. Although big declarations are being made, behind the scenes “creative steps” and “tricks” are the real order of the day. One example of trickery comes from Russia, Bojanowski writes: Although Russia has announced it wants to reduce emissions 25% by 2030 compared to 1990 – this is in fact trickery. Because of the collapse of its industry during the 1990s, the country is emitting only half as much CO2 as it did in 1990. That means with respect to climate targets, Russia intends to emit more CO2 in the future.” And not less! In Paris do expect the signing of a “binding international treaty”, but one that will be chock-full of non-binding requirements. The circus (which no one takes seriously anymore) thus will continue.

But … he can then claim, legacy.  Because it’s not something actually having an effect, it’s the intent that’s important in the post-modern world.  So, as we’ve seen in the past, he’ll talk the talk and consider that to be “action taken”.

Somehow, however, money will migrate from your wallet to the government’s in all this while whatever it is the alarmists want done won’t get one iota closer to happening than before.

It’s all about income redistribution and that’s precisely what will be the outcome to this “national security problem”, just hide and watch.

~McQ

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

12 Responses to Delusional and desperate

  • I beg to differ … there are probably hundreds of Obama donors who’s national security is in jeopardy if there isn’t a federally mandated program that they can “rent seek” upon.
    In just a dozen and a half months, Mr Obama won’t be there in DC to steer these programs to his cronies. It is a moral imperative that these contracts and tax credits continue to flow after he is gone, the future of the nation will not be served .. for just a small commission .. if the spigot of programs based on the flimsy evidence of climate science is not opened so a continuous “wallet-ectomy” can be perpetrated on on the “Great Unwashed” of this nation.

    • Dude, if you think Obama is single handedly passing out the cash from the Uncle Santa vault, with respect, you ain’t payin attention.
      He has a great deal of help up on Capitol Hill from the other members of the ruling cadre.

      Speaking of cash – anyone see the Teamster’s are going to be instituting the patented Social Security screwover plan for shafting their pensioners?

  • Unfortunately, aside from the legacy of a much hobbled United States as he leaves office, the only true legacy he’ll leave will be denying a deserving member of the military a spot in Arlington National Cemetery by being buried there himself.

  • So, is some iteration of the Chicago Climate Exchange being resuscitated?

    Gore and OBummer and Jarrett (and their various cronies) were *SO* hoping to reap the multiple millions of dollars that their investments “should” have gotten them…

    It all petered out last time, BUT our dedicated MFMSM is still willing to carry their Masters’ water for another go-around. Where might an inquisitive civilian truth-seeker find out if there’s a new round of carbon exchanges getting set up????

  • Barracula spoke of a “new sea”…which I guess is the future wide-open Arctic.

    You know…the one the Russians are building record-breaking immense and powerful ice-breakers for.

    You really cannot make this up.

    • Yes, didn’t you know, it borders on the other 7 of the 57 United States.

      And of course Bush was stupid.

  • It wouldn’t matter at all that the Russian economy has cratered, along with its CO2 emissions. If they can get us to agree to crater our own economy (along with empowering leftists), they win.

  • Its a game. Obama is going to go so far off the deep end, he’ll make Jeb look good. When Jeb will at best, will freeze the Obamanation, and let himself be called a right wing extremist.

    To be honest, I’d rather have Hillary who will run us to ground, than Jeb who will normalize the situation into the status quo setting the stage for Obama II in 8 years.

    • You know, this is the first thing that I read that made me like Jeb Bush.

      • Pre-campaign oil man connected Jeb comes out saying whoa on AGW, not that its fake, not that we’ve hurt the economy too much to keep going along when no one else does either. No its essentially ‘Let’s pause’ that upon compromise will be “Let’s slow down”.

        Not Hillary is Not Enough.

  • Funny. Not ha-ha funny either.

    All that scientific contentious, and not one ‘scientist’ willing to show their name on a white paper?

    What does that tell you?
    That there is no scientific contentious, least not one a real scientist is willing to put their name to.

    When I hear ‘scientific contentious’, my response is simple: name one, just one.